Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • What Can the Average Person Grasp?

    Mar 20, 2020, 1:04 PM By John Mark

    —“So moral-reasoning in P is not hard. But what about the Grammars, Testimonial Truth, Operational Language, Strictly Constructed Laws, and the Abrahamic Method of Deceit?”– CD

    What can the avg person grasp, and/or what do we need to give them a glimpse of out of necessity? Strictly Constructed Laws – even if they don’t understand the details, this can be sold as solution to activist judges and undermining of the constitution. (You did a great job explaining it on most recent P-constitition video interview.) Abrahamic Method – the term itself triggers Christians, but the basic concept of “don’t say anything that excuses a violation of reciprocity” is understandable by the avg person. Testimonial Truth – details a bit much for avg person, but concept that there’s a checklist courts use to figure out whether a public figure is lying, I think is understandable, and may be necessary to “sell” free truthful speech vs free speech. And the avg person may be able to understand certain aspects of it, such as the concept of lying by omission or lying by mixing 2 concepts/definitions together.

  • Creating a Non-False Pre-Packaged Product

    Mar 20, 2020, 1:48 PM by John Mark

    Christianity (or other religion) as a “prepackaged product” that an individual can pull off the shelf & use to create meaning for their life.

    Great insight – this is so spot-on. It saves them the effort of having to find meaning for themselves. Thus when we try to get them to think, or challenge the pre-packaged product, it feels to them like “I bought this food item, now you’re saying there’s something wrong with it and I need to cultivate a garden and grow my own.” We’re asking them to do extra work that for them is an annoyance (life is hard enough, we are trying to rip away the one thing that feels good and safe to them) and they may not even be able to do it (at least not without training), whereas for people like us it’s a compulsion (we are driven to do it, we can’t help it). So – I guess that would mean that creating a non-false pre-packaged product would likely take away market share from religions that tend to bait into hazard. But asking them to think & do it on their own is too much for most of them.

  • Creating a Non-False Pre-Packaged Product

    Mar 20, 2020, 1:48 PM by John Mark

    Christianity (or other religion) as a “prepackaged product” that an individual can pull off the shelf & use to create meaning for their life.

    Great insight – this is so spot-on. It saves them the effort of having to find meaning for themselves. Thus when we try to get them to think, or challenge the pre-packaged product, it feels to them like “I bought this food item, now you’re saying there’s something wrong with it and I need to cultivate a garden and grow my own.” We’re asking them to do extra work that for them is an annoyance (life is hard enough, we are trying to rip away the one thing that feels good and safe to them) and they may not even be able to do it (at least not without training), whereas for people like us it’s a compulsion (we are driven to do it, we can’t help it). So – I guess that would mean that creating a non-false pre-packaged product would likely take away market share from religions that tend to bait into hazard. But asking them to think & do it on their own is too much for most of them.

  • And can we train feelings and intuitions? Yes.

    Mar 20, 2020, 2:44 PM People break down into three categories because that’s the hierarchy of cognitive development:

    Physical movement > Feel(pre-conscious) > Intuit(conscious) > Think(rational).

    The question is why some of us develop (mature) further than others, and some less so than others. And can we train their feelings and intuitions like we train them with language, grammar, arithmetic, and basic science. The evidence is ‘yes’ but we don’t.

  • And can we train feelings and intuitions? Yes.

    Mar 20, 2020, 2:44 PM People break down into three categories because that’s the hierarchy of cognitive development:

    Physical movement > Feel(pre-conscious) > Intuit(conscious) > Think(rational).

    The question is why some of us develop (mature) further than others, and some less so than others. And can we train their feelings and intuitions like we train them with language, grammar, arithmetic, and basic science. The evidence is ‘yes’ but we don’t.

  • So for Most People, for Most Uses, P Isn’t Hard.

    Mar 20, 2020, 6:14 PM

    —“Being too complex to understand is not necessarily a badge of honor.”–Mike Harvey

    Explanatory power is however a badge of honor. And complexity explains why it has taken until the 21st century to solve it. And, as Bill is trying to get across, applied P is not hard. The P Method is hard, but so is writing the law. The majority of questions are solved by the test of Reciprocity. The hard questions are solved by Testimony – which is reciprocity applied to truth claims. The rest is just understanding WHY. Programming is hard (operations). Economics is hard (equilibration). Disambiguation and serialization is hard. The via negativa is hard (falsification). Abandoning intuition in favor of systemic falsification is harder. And P uses all of that.

  • So for Most People, for Most Uses, P Isn’t Hard.

    Mar 20, 2020, 6:14 PM

    —“Being too complex to understand is not necessarily a badge of honor.”–Mike Harvey

    Explanatory power is however a badge of honor. And complexity explains why it has taken until the 21st century to solve it. And, as Bill is trying to get across, applied P is not hard. The P Method is hard, but so is writing the law. The majority of questions are solved by the test of Reciprocity. The hard questions are solved by Testimony – which is reciprocity applied to truth claims. The rest is just understanding WHY. Programming is hard (operations). Economics is hard (equilibration). Disambiguation and serialization is hard. The via negativa is hard (falsification). Abandoning intuition in favor of systemic falsification is harder. And P uses all of that.

  • Why Do People Hate You so Curt?

    Mar 21, 2020, 7:59 AM

    —“Why do people hate you so curt? I don’t get it”—A Friend

    I Slay sacred cows.P is a via negativa.High investment. Elitist. Intolerant. Exclusionary.Unapologetic. People want power, ideology, philosophy, theology. I say words don’t matter only actions. They want words because they feel powerless to act. I deprive them of the power of words. Leaving only collective action. Where they must compromise on collective results. And pay the costs of achieving them. Rather than shaming or pleading others into doing it for them. Rule of law under P: the power to deny power – including power by words for people powerless and desiring power by words. The only solution is collective action, the law, and then to create new narratives within the law. (mostly)

    —“Reciprocity is active. Haters have crafted arguments they thought were large enough to hide their passivity behind. … The active reciprocity that P demands does not undermine these passive shelters, it does not counter these arguments, it makes them obsolete.”—Luke Weinhagen

  • Why Do People Hate You so Curt?

    Mar 21, 2020, 7:59 AM

    —“Why do people hate you so curt? I don’t get it”—A Friend

    I Slay sacred cows.P is a via negativa.High investment. Elitist. Intolerant. Exclusionary.Unapologetic. People want power, ideology, philosophy, theology. I say words don’t matter only actions. They want words because they feel powerless to act. I deprive them of the power of words. Leaving only collective action. Where they must compromise on collective results. And pay the costs of achieving them. Rather than shaming or pleading others into doing it for them. Rule of law under P: the power to deny power – including power by words for people powerless and desiring power by words. The only solution is collective action, the law, and then to create new narratives within the law. (mostly)

    —“Reciprocity is active. Haters have crafted arguments they thought were large enough to hide their passivity behind. … The active reciprocity that P demands does not undermine these passive shelters, it does not counter these arguments, it makes them obsolete.”—Luke Weinhagen

  • Tyler Cowen Says the Progressive Left Is Over

    The Coronavirus Killed the Progressive Left – Marginal REVOLUTION marginalrevolution.com https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/03/the-coronavirus-killed-the-progressive-left.html — The EGALITARIANISM of the progressive left also will seem like a faint memory. Elites are most likely to support wealth redistribution when they feel comfortable themselves, and indeed well-off coastal elites in California and the Northeast are a backbone of the progressive movement. But when these people feel threatened in their lives or occupations, or when the futures of their children suddenly seem less secure, redistribution will not be such a compelling ideal… — The case for MASS TRANSIT also will seem weaker, because subways and buses will be associated with the fear of Covid-19 transmission. In a similar fashion, the forces of NIMBY WILL BECOME STRONGER, relative to those of YIMBY, because people secure in their isolated suburban homes will feel less stressed than those in densely packed urban apartment buildings. — There is likely to be much MORE GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION in some parts of the health-care sector, but it will focus on scarce hospital beds and ventilators, and enforce nasty triage, rather than being a benevolent move toward universal coverage. If anything, it will drive home the message that SUPPLY CONSTRAINTS ARE BINDING AND AMERICA CAN’T HAVE EVERYTHING — hardly the traditional progressive message. — — The CLIMATE CHANGE MOVEMENT is likely to be another victim. How much have you heard about Greta Thunberg lately? Concern over the climate will seem like another luxury from safer and more normal times. In addition, the course of anti-Covid-19 efforts may not prove propitious for the climate change movement. If the fight against Covid-19 suddenly improves (perhaps a vaccine working very quickly?), Americans may come to expect the same in the fight against climate change.