Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • They Don’t Want Our Rule

    Feb 7, 2020, 7:46 PM

    They want proximity to us but they don’t want our rule. Well, great, we don’t want to rule them, but we won’t tolerate their rule either.

  • Anglo Common “Adversarial” Law Persisted for A Reason

    Feb 7, 2020, 9:15 PM

    —“Depending on the legal market and parties involved, the adversarial nature of law can actually be quite constructive. You come to learn quickly who the honest but zealous advocates are, as opposed to the slimy, deceitful guys trying to hide evidence, defend absurd positions, etc. Especially in small markets, the two groups quickly separate, as oil and water, and interactions between the honest group are beneficial to themselves and their clients. The deceitful scum generally cost themselves and their clients in the long run. They value face over truth, and that’s soon apparent to those who value truth more highly.”–Brad Lehman

  • Anglo Common “Adversarial” Law Persisted for A Reason

    Feb 7, 2020, 9:15 PM

    —“Depending on the legal market and parties involved, the adversarial nature of law can actually be quite constructive. You come to learn quickly who the honest but zealous advocates are, as opposed to the slimy, deceitful guys trying to hide evidence, defend absurd positions, etc. Especially in small markets, the two groups quickly separate, as oil and water, and interactions between the honest group are beneficial to themselves and their clients. The deceitful scum generally cost themselves and their clients in the long run. They value face over truth, and that’s soon apparent to those who value truth more highly.”–Brad Lehman

  • You Can’t Stop Noticing

    Feb 7, 2020, 9:22 PM

    —“I must give you credit, because once you notice the relatively subtle methods of deceit through framing, etc., you can’t stop noticing, and it can be tremendously valuable. Even in legal brief-writing. “Your Honor, notice how they attempted to deceive you by….” … People are too accustomed to thinking of deceit only in terms of outright lies. But the other methods of deceit are crucial to understand as well. You have been instrumental in my understanding of those.— A Friend.

    Hugs brother. It’s hard to believe the promise we make, that if you learn P, it will influence you – and once you understand how the deceits are constructed you see them everywhere. And if you can see and name a thing, you can defeat a thing.

  • You Can’t Stop Noticing

    Feb 7, 2020, 9:22 PM

    —“I must give you credit, because once you notice the relatively subtle methods of deceit through framing, etc., you can’t stop noticing, and it can be tremendously valuable. Even in legal brief-writing. “Your Honor, notice how they attempted to deceive you by….” … People are too accustomed to thinking of deceit only in terms of outright lies. But the other methods of deceit are crucial to understand as well. You have been instrumental in my understanding of those.— A Friend.

    Hugs brother. It’s hard to believe the promise we make, that if you learn P, it will influence you – and once you understand how the deceits are constructed you see them everywhere. And if you can see and name a thing, you can defeat a thing.

  • Vets

    Feb 7, 2020, 10:00 PM There are a lot of vets with issues – maybe most of them. They need organization and purpose but the problem with the current military is that they have been put to imperial rather than national use, forced to fight 4gw in hostile territory, where everyone is some degree of foe, forced to fight in these conditions under absurd rules of engagement, forced to fight in those intolerable conditions for longer periods than is mentally tolerable for humans, had their reason for fighting destroyed, effectively lost every recent war, and under an upper bureaucracy that is in their view immoral and absent honor – so they come back having fought for broken policy, to save a broken civilization, into a society that is broken, when they are broken, and they lack leadership to un-break both society and themselves in the process. In this sense they are a market. They are however, a market that requires a different product. We have produced a revolution in thought that unites the sciences and makes possible the restoration of our traditional law and culture in scientific and legal terms. We have produced a constitution that we can use as a solution that I hope will animate people across the spectrum – other than immigrants, the state, financial, academy, and entertainment sectors. We are working slowly on producing a philosophy that applies it to personal life. But we have not produced a story of their place in that unbroken world, where they will be unbroken, and they are valued in ensuring it remains unbroken. So what we have learned from this challenging period is that we have a market that we can satisfy largely by giving it purpose.

  • Vets

    Feb 7, 2020, 10:00 PM There are a lot of vets with issues – maybe most of them. They need organization and purpose but the problem with the current military is that they have been put to imperial rather than national use, forced to fight 4gw in hostile territory, where everyone is some degree of foe, forced to fight in these conditions under absurd rules of engagement, forced to fight in those intolerable conditions for longer periods than is mentally tolerable for humans, had their reason for fighting destroyed, effectively lost every recent war, and under an upper bureaucracy that is in their view immoral and absent honor – so they come back having fought for broken policy, to save a broken civilization, into a society that is broken, when they are broken, and they lack leadership to un-break both society and themselves in the process. In this sense they are a market. They are however, a market that requires a different product. We have produced a revolution in thought that unites the sciences and makes possible the restoration of our traditional law and culture in scientific and legal terms. We have produced a constitution that we can use as a solution that I hope will animate people across the spectrum – other than immigrants, the state, financial, academy, and entertainment sectors. We are working slowly on producing a philosophy that applies it to personal life. But we have not produced a story of their place in that unbroken world, where they will be unbroken, and they are valued in ensuring it remains unbroken. So what we have learned from this challenging period is that we have a market that we can satisfy largely by giving it purpose.

  • Via-Negativa Moral Rules (Prohibitions) Are Empirical

    Feb 7, 2020, 10:43 PM Well via-negativa moral rules (prohibitions) are empirical and there is only one: reciprocity within the limits of proportionality. Like rational choice within the limits of rationality. Like truthfulness within the limits of testifiability. That’s just obvious from a study of the history of law across every civilization. What satisfies reciprocity whether in manners, ethics (interpersonal), morals (extra-personal) varies because of differences in geography, economy, family structure, means of production, and stage of development – or more simply, dependent upon the scale of cooperation and the homogeneity or heterogeneity of the population in relation to its state of development. General Semantics by Korzybski, while originally an attempt to explain non-aristotelian frames of reference, was a (rather silly) dead end, just as is Eric Ganz’s present Generative Anthropology, and Derrida’s persistent trend in postmodernism, and somewhat less so Chomsky’s generative grammar. In the end Bourland extended the entire program to nothing more than eliminating the copula (verb to be) which, in english, eliminates the pretense of knowledge and clarifies thinking in the process. This effectively ended the GS program as a dead end. In P we use eliminating of the copula to prevent false knowledge claims by the no-operational obscurantism permitted by its use. This is particularly useful in suppressing the abrahamic method of deceit. Now, conversely Hilbert in mathematical physics, Bridgman in physics, Brouwer in mathematics, and (badly) Mises in economics all either criticized the set basis of mathematics, the Einstein-Bohr and Copenhagen consensus, or monetary economics as pseudoscientific – and only Bridgman succeeded in reforming physics. Even though, today, we have software to perform the drudgery of testing proofs. Turing and Godel brought about operational model and programming completed the transition between operational and computable and deductive. Minsky (correctly) stated that programming was a new method of thinking, because it completes the restoration of western thought back to its origins in ‘engineering’ (geometry) in the process begun by Descartes. But It wasn’t until the eighties and early nineties that psychology started to reform under operationism, and until P there was no solution to operationalizing social science. That’s enough for now. (BTW: I don’t take devolution to use of Godwin’s Law as anything other than evidence of my winning the argument.) And yes the only reason I respond is so that I can post these answers on the main feed to educate others

    • cheers.

  • Via-Negativa Moral Rules (Prohibitions) Are Empirical

    Feb 7, 2020, 10:43 PM Well via-negativa moral rules (prohibitions) are empirical and there is only one: reciprocity within the limits of proportionality. Like rational choice within the limits of rationality. Like truthfulness within the limits of testifiability. That’s just obvious from a study of the history of law across every civilization. What satisfies reciprocity whether in manners, ethics (interpersonal), morals (extra-personal) varies because of differences in geography, economy, family structure, means of production, and stage of development – or more simply, dependent upon the scale of cooperation and the homogeneity or heterogeneity of the population in relation to its state of development. General Semantics by Korzybski, while originally an attempt to explain non-aristotelian frames of reference, was a (rather silly) dead end, just as is Eric Ganz’s present Generative Anthropology, and Derrida’s persistent trend in postmodernism, and somewhat less so Chomsky’s generative grammar. In the end Bourland extended the entire program to nothing more than eliminating the copula (verb to be) which, in english, eliminates the pretense of knowledge and clarifies thinking in the process. This effectively ended the GS program as a dead end. In P we use eliminating of the copula to prevent false knowledge claims by the no-operational obscurantism permitted by its use. This is particularly useful in suppressing the abrahamic method of deceit. Now, conversely Hilbert in mathematical physics, Bridgman in physics, Brouwer in mathematics, and (badly) Mises in economics all either criticized the set basis of mathematics, the Einstein-Bohr and Copenhagen consensus, or monetary economics as pseudoscientific – and only Bridgman succeeded in reforming physics. Even though, today, we have software to perform the drudgery of testing proofs. Turing and Godel brought about operational model and programming completed the transition between operational and computable and deductive. Minsky (correctly) stated that programming was a new method of thinking, because it completes the restoration of western thought back to its origins in ‘engineering’ (geometry) in the process begun by Descartes. But It wasn’t until the eighties and early nineties that psychology started to reform under operationism, and until P there was no solution to operationalizing social science. That’s enough for now. (BTW: I don’t take devolution to use of Godwin’s Law as anything other than evidence of my winning the argument.) And yes the only reason I respond is so that I can post these answers on the main feed to educate others

    • cheers.

  • Science Has Made Anything Other than Deism Impossible

    Feb 8, 2020, 9:05 AM It’s because science has made anything other than deism impossible for rational people, the bible and church dogma unbelievable, and the narratives that attempt to teach lessons irrelevant, absurd, or quaint – precisely because there is only one lesson. That’s before we get to the clergy being unworthy of respect, and the catholic clergy forever tainted by child abuse. People behave well because of the experience of safety in the burial, church, temple, military, marriage, feast sport,, festival experiences. This forms an addiction, just as safety in mother forms an addiction, just as friendship forms an addiction, just as sex forms an addiction – the reason we are open to addiction is because evolution’s way of keeping us invested in one another. We vary in the masculinity and femininity of brain structure which translates to a more empathic, social, and emotional or a more analytic, political, and action-oriented need. And the value of church (organized religion) dependent upon demand for inclusion. So thee church is evolving into satisfying only those people with the emotional and social needs that cannot be fulfilled by other means. Hence the uneducated, female, homosexual, dysfunctional, laboring class lower middle class shift in church demographics – and with it the economic collapse of church finances. So as usual, I go with the data. And the data isn’t pretty. Our religion like most, arose in concert with the agrarian age, and it has failed to transform for the industrial age. It satisfied demand for harmony in that age. And so given that people need a binding mythos and the rituals to reinforce it for social and political reasons, and at least half the population needs mindfulness for psychological reasons, how do we restore the utility of our old religion’s market for heroic figures under the same ethical and moral strategy, while preserving the christian moral and ethical strategy? The church hadn’t suppressed the saints, the path would be easier, since we could rotate archetypes as civilization changed, just as they did before monopoly (authoritarian) monotheistic abrahamic religions. So, we can’t do it and I think that is what is killing christianity as other than the religion of the world’s underclasses (Africa, South America). Religion teaches strategy for harmony and argument to persist it, but morality is something we know scientifically as reciprocity. But reciprocity tells us only to do no harm – to pay the cost of doing no harm.. Jesus teaches us to ignore our internal instincts and pay the cost of exhaustive forgiveness of ourselves and others. This tells us that we must pay the cost of harmony by bearing costs. And charity tells us that we must pay the cost of doing good. So while Aryanism, our ancient (market) religion, tells us to pay costs of excellence in all things and to be leaders in all things. Christianity, our medieval (monopoly) religion, tells us to pay costs of bringing people along with us. And our oldest religion of the hearth (nature, green man, elves, etc), tells us that nature is animal, childlike, and mischievous not evil, and we must be diligent against her mischief. These three religions were and remain in competition with another. Then the jews brought about marxism, socialism, feminism, and postmodernism, to destroy us as they brought christianity to destroy our reason, stoicism, epicureanism, and excellences in the ancient world. How do I, or we, help our people from not having another semitic dark age – even if our people, like addicts, desire it?