Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • There is so much “shyte” written about Hayek that it’s impossible to defend him

    There is so much “shyte” written about Hayek that it’s impossible to defend him against the cabbages of sophism. Look, Hayek in the sensory order, in the Knowledge Problem, in the Pricing System’s solution to the Knowledge Problem, can only be understood as he finally understood it, as a question of the Law, and the LAW as the institutional means of preserving the exceptionalism of western civilization.

    We do not submit to the market, we submit to the law, and we do so because it is, as in all cases, the means by which we provide no incentive to others to fail to submit to the law. The fact that we finally had power of the purse sufficient to interfere in the economy merely required hayek to expand it.

    Fortunately for me, and unfortunately for hayek, I was born after Turing (and chomsky) and Hayek before. So Hayek’s work can be completed in a method he could sense in the Sensory Order but not develop into the Science of Law he finally understood was the NEGATIVE means by which we produce positive ends. Popper got partway there. Hayek got partway there. Turing got partway there. Chomsky took turing and added a little bit more. But it was too late to prevent the 20th century’s consumption of the accumulated capital of western civilization.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-03 12:36:00 UTC

  • “Bad faith arguments aren’t worth tolerating. Waste of everyone’s time, and wors

    —“Bad faith arguments aren’t worth tolerating. Waste of everyone’s time, and worse… Sometimes they catch on.”—Ely Harman

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-03 12:24:00 UTC

  • SUN TZU’S ART OF WAR A WORK OF AGENCY (worth repeating) There is only one book i

    SUN TZU’S ART OF WAR A WORK OF AGENCY

    (worth repeating)

    There is only one book in world literature that is an equal to the western canon, and that is the art of war – although the european works of Machiavelli, are more advanced, the universal applicability of the first of all does it best.

    It is an essay in the amoral (not immoral). We spend so much time in moral mind, we leave ourselves open to defeat. So,he retrains us to think objectively rather than morally. It is not a book about war. It is a book by which we restore agency, lost in the training of our norms.

    Machiavelli provides the same advice more directly in The Prince and his Art of War: morality has no place in war or its preparation.

    The norms ‘untrain us’ to succeed in war. Hece all men must be trained in both war of the amoral, and commerce and cooperation of the moral.

    (Said this sometime in the past few days and thought it needed repeating that these books are not on war. They are on restoring that which we are untrained in civil orders, and must be if we are to survive competitors.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-03 12:10:00 UTC

  • THE TRUTH IS ENOUGH TO RESTORE THE WEST Truth is enough. End the lies. End The E

    THE TRUTH IS ENOUGH TO RESTORE THE WEST

    Truth is enough. End the lies. End The Entire Abrahamic Program of Lies: False Reality, False History, False Promise (Moral Hazard), Pilpul (via positiva sophism), Critique (via negativa sophism), Straw Manning, and the Dysgenic Strategy of the Herd fearing being left behind by their betters.

    Ethnocentrism; Nationalism; Nature, Ancestor, and Monarchical Thanks (worship), and the inheritance that they have left us as Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, Merit, The Natural Law, A Jury of our Peers, The Militia of Sovereign Men, Markets In everything, and the science and technology that has provided in the present, what *Those Who Lie* had promised them.

    No More Lies. Restore Our Natural Law, and Our Natural Religion, to our Natural Peoples.

    WE MUST RULE, IF NOT FOR THE SAKE OF ALL MANKIND, BUT OUT OF SELF DEFENSE.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-03 10:31:00 UTC

  • “CURT: WHAT DOES YOUR |?????| >>> SYNTAX MEAN?” —“Can you help me understand t

    “CURT: WHAT DOES YOUR |?????| >>> SYNTAX MEAN?”

    —“Can you help me understand the syntax you use? What does the vertical bar ” | ” mean? And this ” > “?”— Eric Grose

    Great Question:

    | DIMENSION | start limit > step > step > step > end limit.

    Where >, <, <-, and ->, state the direction. So you will see me use < < <, or > > >, or < < <- center -> > > depending upon the direction.

    It’s a “Dimension” definition, meaning an ordered range of values that are permissible for use in a property of a Class (definition).

    It defines the LIMITS (start and end) and COMPLETENESS (range of values), in PARSIMONIOUS FORM, thereby satisfying Testimonialism’s demand for both LIMITS and FULL ACCOUNTING for any warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit.

    Given a Class (Table), consisting of (a) Properties(Attributes) and their Values (data), (b) Relations (references), and (c) Methods (internal operations), and (d) functions (external operations), a Dimension provides the range of values permissible for a property.

    It’ is a geometric (linear, serialize) method of defining a dimension (table of values).

    So we convert:

    |TEACHING| Reading to > Lecturing > Socratic Teaching > Running a grad seminar > Running an MBA/Law course (case studies) > Running a Competitive Game > Military Training.

    Into:

    Define TEACHING: id: int, str: category.

    Insert TEACHING:

    | TEACHING |

    1, Reading to

    2, Lecturing

    3, Socratic Teaching

    4, Running a grad seminar

    5, Running an MBA/Law course (case studies)

    6, Running a Competitive Game

    7, Military Training

    (a tiny bit of the relational calculus)

    WHY?

    Because the grammars allow us to produce an N-Dimensional geometry of ‘meaning’. But that is not something I am going to put into this series of the work. It’s like putting equations in to it. So I’m using the Series instead.

    OK?

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-03 09:56:00 UTC

  • THE SPECTRUM OF TRAINING |TEACHING| Reading to > Lecturing > Socratic Teaching >

    THE SPECTRUM OF TRAINING

    |TEACHING| Reading to > Lecturing > Socratic Teaching > Running a grad seminar > Running an MBA/Law course (case studies) > Running a Competitive Game > Military Training.

    I run games. Because that is what men need.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-03 08:49:00 UTC

  • MY VERSION OF THE SOCRATIC METHOD: COMPETITION I teach by creating games that me

    MY VERSION OF THE SOCRATIC METHOD: COMPETITION

    I teach by creating games that men will compete in. This is how men are best taught. Instead of asking questions I start arguments. Instead of preaching an angle, I attack a proposition and force others to defend it. Instead of assuming equality I play king of the hill and bait them into attacking me. Instead of writing essays of appeal I write arguments to criticize.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-03 08:38:00 UTC

  • OK. So the military says they can’t send overstretched troops to the mexican bor

    OK. So the military says they can’t send overstretched troops to the mexican border and the left seems to think that in the coming revolution will be settled by the state, and the right thinks the state will intervene. Like I said, this is the most fragile empire in history. There are only two cities with police forces capable of maintaining any semblance of order. The military will eitner not act, or act insufficiently. This is why the Federal Government armed everyone that they could in the bureaucracy. Because they knew it was coming. If revolutionaries publish their demands and they are reasonable, it very hard to see the police and the national guard or the military disagreeing with them.

    Again. remember when Y’all said you couldn’t believe it would happen? That’s cause Y’all didn’t know your data and your history.

    Revolution Comes.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-03 08:28:00 UTC

  • GEOGRAPHY FORESTLANDS: Aristocratic Ethics: What will someone not retaliate agai

    GEOGRAPHY

    FORESTLANDS: Aristocratic Ethics: What will someone not retaliate against even if we agree to it?(rulers/teleological ethics:outcomes) The ethics of warriors who must hold territory. This is a very high cost strategy because while professional warrior aristocracy is militarily superior, smaller numbers mean threats must be constantly suppressed when small, as soon as identified. (Profiting from the domestication of man)

    – BORDERLANDS: Cosmopolitan(Jewish) Ethics: What will someone consent to Regardless of future resentment and retaliation? (borderland/subculture/deontological ethics:rules) The ethics of diasporic, migrating traders, or herding peoples who can prey upon the locals who hold territory. This is a very low cost (parasitic) ethics that avoids all contribution to the host commons, but requires preserving the ability to exit (migrate). It is the raider strategy by systemic and verbal rather than physical means.

    – STEPPELANDS: Russian(Orthodox) Ethics: What can I get away with now by negotiation and subterfuge, and hold by force later? (steppe raiders) The ethics of steppe people surrounded by competitors, always hostile and unpredictable. This is a difficult and expensive but only possible strategy, when one is surrounded by hostile opportunity seekers. While seemingly expansive, it’s actually a fearful one – aggression as the only possible means of controlling defensive positions across open territory.

    — FERTILE CRESCENT LAND: (Profit from the subjugation of man) (cyrus was lost).

    – RIVERLANDS: Chinese Ethics: What can I get away with now, but over time make impossible to change later? The ethics of long term ruling bureaucratic class. Sun Tzu strategy, and Confucian hyper familism. This is an exceptionally cost-effective strategy if one possesses a territorial resource (heartland), and can fortify that heartland. Riverlands strategy defends against Steppland and Desertland strategies. (Profiting from the domestication of man)

    – DESERTLANDS: Muslim Ethics: (I am still working on this one because I don’t get that it’s causal, but opportunistic.) What can I justify now in order to make this minor advance now? And thereby accumulate wins by wearing down opponents over long periods. The ethics of opportunism. As far as I can tell islam is just an excuse for justifying opportunism. We can consider this the combination of religion and justifying opportunism – a long term very successful strategy becuase it’s very low cost.

    – HOSTILELANDS: African Ethics (pre-christian). Africa is akin to the Desertlands because of the sheer number of competitors, the hostility of the disease gradient, the plethora of wildlife, combined with the primitiveness of the available technologies. This is the only possible strategy until one or more core states can evolve, and create sufficient stability in some regions. (this is occurring now).

    CIVILIZATIONS NOT STATES

    It is a mistake (always), to consider conflicts within states over local power (capital allocation), as of the same consequence as conflicts between civilizations over borders. Because the former is a kinship conflict over priorities, while the latter is a genetic conflict over group evolutionary strategies.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-03 03:08:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-03 02:11:00 UTC