Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • The Techniques: Using Sophistry for Deception

    Apr 25, 2020, 7:19 PM Our Logical Facility

    … Reason:

    … … 1. theology: wisdom: mythology, literary wisdom literature. … … … theo-sophistry: supernatural sophistry, abrahamism

    … … 2. philosophy: choice: realism, naturalism, operationalism, rational choice, reciprocity, completeness … … … philo-sophistry: Idealism (platonism), textual interpretation, …. philosophical rationalism.

    … … 3. Law: testimony: by realism, naturalism, operationalism … … … legal-sophistry: ( … )

    … … 4. science: testimony: by realism, naturalism, operationalism … … … pseudo-science: material sophistry (…)

    … … 5. mathematics: … … … pseudo-mathematics: (…)TOOLS OF DECEIT |Falsehood -> Deceit|: … Ignorance -> Error > … … Bias->wishful_thiking > … … … Loading->framing > … … … … Suggestion->Obscurantism > … … … … … Sophistry->Idealism (verbal) > … … … … … … Magic ->Pseudoscience (physical) > … … … … … … … Occult-> Supernaturalism (imaginary) > … … … … … … … … Fiction (fabrication) > … … … … … … … … … Denial

  • Yes. in That Sense, Wittgenstein Is Correct

    Apr 25, 2020, 8:44 PM

    —“Do you recommend a Wittgenstein approach, a la philosophy just being a misunderstanding of language?“—Caleb Stevenson

    [C]orrect. I didn’t understand until I’d finished the grammars, and come to the same conclusion, but yes. he’s correct. Philosophy is either an error, a pseudoscience, or a deceit. If we instead say that we have a problem of continuously reorganizing our paradigms to accommodate new knowledge, and from that to develop new choices (tactics) of transcendence (evolution) then that is the place I see for philosophical inquiry. But truth is still a matter of law and its systems of measurement science and mathematics. All language consists of measurements. We can measure poorly or well.

  • Yes. in That Sense, Wittgenstein Is Correct

    Apr 25, 2020, 8:44 PM

    —“Do you recommend a Wittgenstein approach, a la philosophy just being a misunderstanding of language?“—Caleb Stevenson

    [C]orrect. I didn’t understand until I’d finished the grammars, and come to the same conclusion, but yes. he’s correct. Philosophy is either an error, a pseudoscience, or a deceit. If we instead say that we have a problem of continuously reorganizing our paradigms to accommodate new knowledge, and from that to develop new choices (tactics) of transcendence (evolution) then that is the place I see for philosophical inquiry. But truth is still a matter of law and its systems of measurement science and mathematics. All language consists of measurements. We can measure poorly or well.

  • Religion and The Sects

    Apr 25, 2020, 8:59 PM Religion combines wisdom literature, rituals, and social assembly to create personal, interpersonal, social, and political mindfulness with of a system of intuitive, coherent measurement, that relieves the pre-consious brain of stress about status, conflict, and uncertainty. We gain the elation of the primitive animal running with, hunting, feasting, resting, and safety within the pack (herd). Narratives (stories) using archetypes (expressions of instincts) are the most imprecise but universal and easily understood system of measurement. Christianity works. Religion works. Institutions, traditions, laws, and norms work. For the same reason: error elimination on one hand, and norm creation on the other, together which reduce cognitive load, which reduce stress, which maintains self image, which maintains status in interacting with others. Of the christian sects it appears that we find the best of something in each group. In evangelical protestantism we find the closest to Jesus’ teachings. In orthodoxy we find the preservation of tradition, and nationalism. In Catholicism we find an attempt at an intellectual and philosophical expansion of the underlying theology. In secular christianity we find the completion of the christian evolution into the via negativa natural law AND via positiva christian love. I can quite easily explain what we find as failing in each of those traditions – most of which result in (a) universalism (b) failure to accommodate the fundamental, ritualistic-traditional, phiosophical-moral, and scientific spectrum – and worse, a failure to integrate and retain our martial gods and their teachings – that saved us in the real world when christianity failed. I admit when I’m wrong all the time. I make many mistakes (irrelevant) but I err (relevant) very infrequently. Not because I am special but because the P-method makes it very, very, difficult to err.

  • Religion and The Sects

    Apr 25, 2020, 8:59 PM Religion combines wisdom literature, rituals, and social assembly to create personal, interpersonal, social, and political mindfulness with of a system of intuitive, coherent measurement, that relieves the pre-consious brain of stress about status, conflict, and uncertainty. We gain the elation of the primitive animal running with, hunting, feasting, resting, and safety within the pack (herd). Narratives (stories) using archetypes (expressions of instincts) are the most imprecise but universal and easily understood system of measurement. Christianity works. Religion works. Institutions, traditions, laws, and norms work. For the same reason: error elimination on one hand, and norm creation on the other, together which reduce cognitive load, which reduce stress, which maintains self image, which maintains status in interacting with others. Of the christian sects it appears that we find the best of something in each group. In evangelical protestantism we find the closest to Jesus’ teachings. In orthodoxy we find the preservation of tradition, and nationalism. In Catholicism we find an attempt at an intellectual and philosophical expansion of the underlying theology. In secular christianity we find the completion of the christian evolution into the via negativa natural law AND via positiva christian love. I can quite easily explain what we find as failing in each of those traditions – most of which result in (a) universalism (b) failure to accommodate the fundamental, ritualistic-traditional, phiosophical-moral, and scientific spectrum – and worse, a failure to integrate and retain our martial gods and their teachings – that saved us in the real world when christianity failed. I admit when I’m wrong all the time. I make many mistakes (irrelevant) but I err (relevant) very infrequently. Not because I am special but because the P-method makes it very, very, difficult to err.

  • The Secularization Debate

    Apr 26, 2020, 9:37 AM Read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularization And This Philip S. Gorski (2000) “Historicizing the Secularization Debate: Church, State, and Society in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ca. 1300 to 1700” American Sociological Review (65:1) Special Issue: “Looking Forward, Looking Back: Continuity and Change at the Turn of the Millenium” pp. 138-167 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2657295 The Disciplinary Revolution In his 2003 book, The Disciplinary Revolution: Calvinism and the Rise of the State in Early Modern Europe,[5] Gorski offers a new explanation for the rise of a strong, centralized nation-state in certain areas of Europe in early Modernity, when other areas were not as successful.[citation needed] Gorski rejects[citation needed] two of the dominant explanations, which are the bellicist explanation, which sees military growth as key to the emergence of strong states, and the neo-Marxist explanation, which sees economic factors as key to the explanation. Instead, Gorski points to the strong influence of religion in the formation of strong states. Specifically, Gorski sees Calvinism as crucial to the emergence of the Netherlands and Prussia as strong, centralized states, because of its emphasis on discipline and public order. The effects of Calvinism could be seen in crime rates, in education, in military effectiveness, in financial responsibility, and many other parts of Dutch and Prussian social life, all of which increased their ability to form bureaucratic states.[citation needed] Where in the Netherlands the effect of Calvinism was from the ground upwards, as most of its population was indeed Calvinist, in Prussia—where most of the population was Lutheran and only the royal house was Calvinist—the effect was from the rulers downwards (to some extent through the Pietist Lutheran movement, which was influenced by Calvinism).[citation needed]

  • The Secularization Debate

    Apr 26, 2020, 9:37 AM Read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularization And This Philip S. Gorski (2000) “Historicizing the Secularization Debate: Church, State, and Society in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe, ca. 1300 to 1700” American Sociological Review (65:1) Special Issue: “Looking Forward, Looking Back: Continuity and Change at the Turn of the Millenium” pp. 138-167 http://www.jstor.org/stable/2657295 The Disciplinary Revolution In his 2003 book, The Disciplinary Revolution: Calvinism and the Rise of the State in Early Modern Europe,[5] Gorski offers a new explanation for the rise of a strong, centralized nation-state in certain areas of Europe in early Modernity, when other areas were not as successful.[citation needed] Gorski rejects[citation needed] two of the dominant explanations, which are the bellicist explanation, which sees military growth as key to the emergence of strong states, and the neo-Marxist explanation, which sees economic factors as key to the explanation. Instead, Gorski points to the strong influence of religion in the formation of strong states. Specifically, Gorski sees Calvinism as crucial to the emergence of the Netherlands and Prussia as strong, centralized states, because of its emphasis on discipline and public order. The effects of Calvinism could be seen in crime rates, in education, in military effectiveness, in financial responsibility, and many other parts of Dutch and Prussian social life, all of which increased their ability to form bureaucratic states.[citation needed] Where in the Netherlands the effect of Calvinism was from the ground upwards, as most of its population was indeed Calvinist, in Prussia—where most of the population was Lutheran and only the royal house was Calvinist—the effect was from the rulers downwards (to some extent through the Pietist Lutheran movement, which was influenced by Calvinism).[citation needed]

  • Confronting the Comforting Lies

    Apr 26, 2020, 1:35 PM by Noah J Revoy Messed up people have a hard time applying P because it forces them to confront the comforting lies they tell themselves. I’m working on applications that are digestible and move people closer to truth. In a world where people were raised right and taught Agency as a natural course of growing up it would be easy to apply P as a tool to prevent parasitism and lies from taking root.

  • Confronting the Comforting Lies

    Apr 26, 2020, 1:35 PM by Noah J Revoy Messed up people have a hard time applying P because it forces them to confront the comforting lies they tell themselves. I’m working on applications that are digestible and move people closer to truth. In a world where people were raised right and taught Agency as a natural course of growing up it would be easy to apply P as a tool to prevent parasitism and lies from taking root.

  • How to Counter Chinese Chest Beating

    —“USA independence: 1783 AD, Han dynasty: 206 BC–220 AD. can you do the math?”—金田ホトトギス @goldfieldcuckoo

    I can. And I can ask you, if china is surrounded by mountains, desert and ocean, and if china is so far away from Mesopotamia, Persia, and Islam, how did you manage to fail with so much time in so much safety? We began in 1500bc near ukraine and settled in poland, and spread in all directions from there. We had a dark age in 1200 bc to 800bc that destroyed the entire civilized world. Between 700bc and 300ad, in just four hundred years, the greeks invented politics, geometry, reason, science, the Antikythera, and the steam engine. Were it not for accidents we could have had the industrial revolution within two centuries. Next, we suffered the Jewish-Christian and Islamic Dark Age – and you didn’t. But again, we saved ourselves, and in just 600 years, explored and connected the world by trade, invented the calculus and all advanced mathematics, the logics, all the physical sciences, the social sciences, all technology, all medicine, and took man into space, and raised you out of ignorance, poverty, starvation and disease. You started in 2500bc. We started in 1500bc. So you had a THOUSAND YEARS in prehistory. We didn’t catch up until 800ad. We were viable from 800bc-100ad and were invaded. We had a dark age from 400ad-1400ad. You another THOUSAND YEARS in the middle ages. Why did you fail? (I know) You failed because Chinese people are ‘petty’, like women. You do face-before-truth, like women. Your pride is easily offended like women. You delay and deceive because you fear conflict like women. You feel the need for power instead of reciprocity – like women. You don’t trust – like women. You cheat – like women. You lie like women. Why? It’s genetic. You have low T. You hyper-evolved submissiveness and over-extended Neoteny. You are a nation of status conscious petty women, who must have consensus because you lack the honor and truth to negotiate compromise. This is why your plans to rule the world will fail. No one else has the knowledge or courage to say the truth to you. It is bad manners for my people to tell you this truth. The difference between races is the degree of neoteny and the sex-direction of it. Africans low neoteny high masculine. Chinese high neoteny, high feminine. Europeans are in the middle. Jews are medium neoteny high feminine very eugenic. Muslims are medium neoteny, feminine, very dysgenic. This is why you fail. You desire harmony. Harmony is the instinct of women. You are weak because you need consensus. You are slow because you need consensus and authority. We don’t care any longer. We learned our lesson this time Mankind is unfit for peerage. We need only ‘build a wall’ to keep out the barbarians. So there is no race to win with you. The only race is to godhood. And we have a very great advantage. Because we speak the truth. Because we have courage to do so. Because we are men.