Source: Original Site Post

  • Context

    Operationalism: Testimony using a sequence of intuitionistically(incentives), logically(speech), and physically testable actions. Operational constraints: Realism( Material, Persistent), Naturalism(physical rules of the material universe), Operationalism(description as human actions), Empiricism(observations of results reduced to analogy of experience by physical or logical means), rational choice, reciprocity. Science: the production of testimony by under operationalism Philosophy: “it’s sorta like that but I can’t explain how”: Analogies. Excuse making. Making stuff up. Sigh.

  • Context

    Operationalism: Testimony using a sequence of intuitionistically(incentives), logically(speech), and physically testable actions. Operational constraints: Realism( Material, Persistent), Naturalism(physical rules of the material universe), Operationalism(description as human actions), Empiricism(observations of results reduced to analogy of experience by physical or logical means), rational choice, reciprocity. Science: the production of testimony by under operationalism Philosophy: “it’s sorta like that but I can’t explain how”: Analogies. Excuse making. Making stuff up. Sigh.

  • There will be no United States without Adapting to it.

    —“Liberia’s constitution is almost identical to the american constitution. Constitutions merely enumerate the process for adhering to the norms, traditions ,and genetics of the majority ethnic population, and set the terms of integration for those outside the majority ethnic population.” – A friend (today)

    Neither the constitution nor the expansion of democratic republic to full franchise democracy nor coercion into social democracy are an more meaningful than the ethnicity of the groups who formed that constitution, and adapted to it. There will be no United States without Adapting to it.

  • There will be no United States without Adapting to it.

    —“Liberia’s constitution is almost identical to the american constitution. Constitutions merely enumerate the process for adhering to the norms, traditions ,and genetics of the majority ethnic population, and set the terms of integration for those outside the majority ethnic population.” – A friend (today)

    Neither the constitution nor the expansion of democratic republic to full franchise democracy nor coercion into social democracy are an more meaningful than the ethnicity of the groups who formed that constitution, and adapted to it. There will be no United States without Adapting to it.

  • Why Christianity (Religion) Works

    [A]n obvious truth I don’t like: Europeans are not only the youngest race (~10k ybp), and more neotenous than other races – except east asians who are more neotenous than we are – but our neoteny comes at the cost of greater emotional instability – which explains european women. We are in a middle range and east asians are off the neotenous cliff. And what does this mean? Neoteny has interesting consequences: not enough and you mature too early for agency except late in life and prevent lifelong learning. If you have enough you develop agency later and lifelong ability to learn, and too much you develop agency early at the cost of life long learning ability. (I might be one of the first people to discuss this, I’m not sure, but it’s obvious in the data.) We could test IQ, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability and then democracy might work. Or we could just restore property owning, married, european males and females employing any number of non-family members – which is demonstrated evidence of intelligence, conscientiousness and emotional stability rather than test evidence. And then a house of women and a house of men to negotiate differences between genders. The chinese used the former, for access to bureaucracy. I recommend the latter because we use markets for production. Evidence is evidence. So what’s my point? My point is that christianity is more necessary for europeans to stabilize the emotions than is obvious from our average intelligence. We tnd to link the two but that’s not really it. That’s why while there is a relationship between religiosity and intelligence, the christian ethic remains constant across the population. I also understand that for those of us who are more pagan, we respect christians out of LOYALTY, like we respect the flag out of LOYALTY and our ancestors out of loyalty.As such I am loyal to my christian brothers, and observant out of loyalty. Even if my god is far closer to Thor-Tyr-Zeus, and my prophets are lawgivers: Odin and Aristotle.The solution is to request loyalty in exchange not that we seek to defeat the gods of dominance and submission to which the opposite cannot tolerate thanks (debt).

  • Why Christianity (Religion) Works

    [A]n obvious truth I don’t like: Europeans are not only the youngest race (~10k ybp), and more neotenous than other races – except east asians who are more neotenous than we are – but our neoteny comes at the cost of greater emotional instability – which explains european women. We are in a middle range and east asians are off the neotenous cliff. And what does this mean? Neoteny has interesting consequences: not enough and you mature too early for agency except late in life and prevent lifelong learning. If you have enough you develop agency later and lifelong ability to learn, and too much you develop agency early at the cost of life long learning ability. (I might be one of the first people to discuss this, I’m not sure, but it’s obvious in the data.) We could test IQ, Conscientiousness, and Emotional Stability and then democracy might work. Or we could just restore property owning, married, european males and females employing any number of non-family members – which is demonstrated evidence of intelligence, conscientiousness and emotional stability rather than test evidence. And then a house of women and a house of men to negotiate differences between genders. The chinese used the former, for access to bureaucracy. I recommend the latter because we use markets for production. Evidence is evidence. So what’s my point? My point is that christianity is more necessary for europeans to stabilize the emotions than is obvious from our average intelligence. We tnd to link the two but that’s not really it. That’s why while there is a relationship between religiosity and intelligence, the christian ethic remains constant across the population. I also understand that for those of us who are more pagan, we respect christians out of LOYALTY, like we respect the flag out of LOYALTY and our ancestors out of loyalty.As such I am loyal to my christian brothers, and observant out of loyalty. Even if my god is far closer to Thor-Tyr-Zeus, and my prophets are lawgivers: Odin and Aristotle.The solution is to request loyalty in exchange not that we seek to defeat the gods of dominance and submission to which the opposite cannot tolerate thanks (debt).

  • More from Joy on My “There Is Nothing Wrong with Africans” Positions

    [J]oy is an african american libertarian, who seems to be frustrated by my argument that there is nothing wrong with africa that six generations of one child policy wouldn’t fix. This isn’t a controversial statement – it’s true for any underdeveloped or developing people. This is our second or third go around. And I think her intellectual bias must be american. Because I tell this to africans all day every day as a way of saying “There is nothing wrong with you or your people except class sizes.” Yet when an american woman hears it she keeps trying to find some irrational racism that isn’t there. I’ve said the same thing for over ten years: the difference in races is neoteny and class size when combined with human ethnocentrism produces political conflict when living in proximity, that generates demand for different commons, different norms, redistribution and authoritarianism at the cost of the high trust civli society.

    —Hi Curt, I know my opinion doesn’t mean anything to you…. You said you didn’t think there was anything wrong with black people but you do. You think white people evolved some ability to “create” truth that the rest of “farm animals” do not have. What does this mean? And please provide proof of it. This is Joy, from Quora.”—

    Ah, well, you’re confused. I said there is a difference in the size of the classes of different ethnic and racial groups. The size of the bottom burdens the top, who cannot lift the people using ‘Pareto Distributions of Assets’ (meaning market economies). I said white people have almost eliminated their bottom classes. And we have had a long time without bottom classes to eliminate bad behavior in our people in the rest of the classes. As for truth, I say because of our history, only white people could develop scientific truth, and high trust societies because of it. But I said that any people on earth that will limit the reproduction of the bottom will eventually be able to have the same high trust society as european people. There is no difference between humans and the other animals we have domesticated. We are just animals like our farm animals.

    —“I know what you said, but historically speaking even though white people have been responsible for most scientific discoveries, you cannot claim the ability to create truth is exclusive to them. Northern and Subsaharan Africans developed technologies smaller and slower than that of white people but still scientific regardless- as did Arabs and Asians although I suspect you consider them white. And as for the “high-trust” societies claim, do you mean democracy? Cos it’s a terrible idea that sounded great when it started but only went downhill. Many races have had civilizations and gods governing their philosophies- the Western world might be the most successful but that doesn’t mean the ability to detect those ideals was exclusive to them. However, I think we are operating on completely different levels of knowledge. You have worked on these philosophies for a good chunk of your life and I’m just getting started. As much as I approach everything in good faith, I don’t take kindly to my race being referred to as “farm animals” (you used this exclusively differentiating from white people) and undesirable but I can’t help but keep going down this rabbit hole.”—-

    I didn’t make that claim. I made the claim that (a) europeans invented scientific truth (promissory, performative, realism, naturalism, operationalism) because we were a purely military social order (militia), and that is military epistemology. And we invented sovereignty (every man is sovereign and none is above him ever). With truth and sovereignty you can only have our laws of sovereignty, tort, reciprocity and jury. Our sciences evolved from the application of our the logic of our laws to our understanding of the universe. So the only means of organizing our people was markets (competition). So we evolved genetically culturally institutionally and scientifically much, much, much faster than all other people combined – both in the prehistoric, in the ancient, and in the modern world. And when we are invaded we are as overwhelmed and fail like all other peoples fail. Because the bottom becomes too big for the top. I didn’t refer to your race (or any race) as farm animals. I said “We are just animals like our farm animals.” and we are self domesticated like we domesticated our farm animals. You might imply I stated others were farm animals when I stated all of us are indifferent from farm animals – domesticated. I you want to take that approach of misstating my words, I’ll say that every race, including whites, has ‘farm animals’ because we are all farm animals – but that some races have far more farm animals than they can raise out of ignorance, superstition, criminality, corruption, and poverty. That’s comical version of saying the same thing: we self domesticated. Which is what I say to all people in africa: there is nothing wrong with africa that six generations of one-child policy will not solve. This is africa’s only problem. It is not to say africans are inferior. it is to say that there are too many at the bottom for whom education in any technology is impossible. This is just statistics. it’s not possible for the bottom to join the advanced world that requires independent learning. and that’s what IQ does. above 105 you start to be able to learn how to repair machines by reading instructions on your own. This is the minimum ability for modern economic survival in a global economy. The problem for africa and for many countries outside of africa is that there are many, many, people that are below that number. This is why china modernized faster than say india, the middle east, and africa. Conversely, it is simply false to say that whites are not the most evolved genetic race, because we are the newest genetic race. We are just ten thousand years old. The primary difference in our race is a minor difference in agency (self control) because of substantial increase in neoteny (slowing the rate of maturity), that we evolved at the cost of emotional instability. Whites are less emotionally stable and more agreeable and introverted. Africans are less agreeable but more extroverted. These differences are small but there are differences. In general, inability to develop neoteny is the problem for the african races: the territory is extremely hostile because of the presence of disease – so rapid maturity was necessary for survival. This rapid maturity has consequences in behavioral development versus more neotenous races, which is well documented in the literature, and visible in all african populations. So between the geography, the distance from major trade routes, the vast size of the lower classes, and faster rates of maturity (and deeper maturity), and the lack of far eastern or western manorialism (eugenic farming) africa’s population distribution is less favorable to advanced development. That says nothing about individual africans and everything about the size of the classes in african countries. The only difference between the smartest africans (usually Ghana and Nigeria) and europeans jews and asians, is minor differences in our verbal and spatial abilities, and the rate at which we can continue learning into older age. However, it is not our best people that determine our fate. It is the number at the bottom that prevents the best people from improving the condition of the rest. Now don’t say you can’t understand that and therefore confirm everyone’s bias. ok? My job is to tell the truth that no one else will so that we solve the problem rather than develop cyclones of lies that just make us all angry.

  • More from Joy on My “There Is Nothing Wrong with Africans” Positions

    [J]oy is an african american libertarian, who seems to be frustrated by my argument that there is nothing wrong with africa that six generations of one child policy wouldn’t fix. This isn’t a controversial statement – it’s true for any underdeveloped or developing people. This is our second or third go around. And I think her intellectual bias must be american. Because I tell this to africans all day every day as a way of saying “There is nothing wrong with you or your people except class sizes.” Yet when an american woman hears it she keeps trying to find some irrational racism that isn’t there. I’ve said the same thing for over ten years: the difference in races is neoteny and class size when combined with human ethnocentrism produces political conflict when living in proximity, that generates demand for different commons, different norms, redistribution and authoritarianism at the cost of the high trust civli society.

    —Hi Curt, I know my opinion doesn’t mean anything to you…. You said you didn’t think there was anything wrong with black people but you do. You think white people evolved some ability to “create” truth that the rest of “farm animals” do not have. What does this mean? And please provide proof of it. This is Joy, from Quora.”—

    Ah, well, you’re confused. I said there is a difference in the size of the classes of different ethnic and racial groups. The size of the bottom burdens the top, who cannot lift the people using ‘Pareto Distributions of Assets’ (meaning market economies). I said white people have almost eliminated their bottom classes. And we have had a long time without bottom classes to eliminate bad behavior in our people in the rest of the classes. As for truth, I say because of our history, only white people could develop scientific truth, and high trust societies because of it. But I said that any people on earth that will limit the reproduction of the bottom will eventually be able to have the same high trust society as european people. There is no difference between humans and the other animals we have domesticated. We are just animals like our farm animals.

    —“I know what you said, but historically speaking even though white people have been responsible for most scientific discoveries, you cannot claim the ability to create truth is exclusive to them. Northern and Subsaharan Africans developed technologies smaller and slower than that of white people but still scientific regardless- as did Arabs and Asians although I suspect you consider them white. And as for the “high-trust” societies claim, do you mean democracy? Cos it’s a terrible idea that sounded great when it started but only went downhill. Many races have had civilizations and gods governing their philosophies- the Western world might be the most successful but that doesn’t mean the ability to detect those ideals was exclusive to them. However, I think we are operating on completely different levels of knowledge. You have worked on these philosophies for a good chunk of your life and I’m just getting started. As much as I approach everything in good faith, I don’t take kindly to my race being referred to as “farm animals” (you used this exclusively differentiating from white people) and undesirable but I can’t help but keep going down this rabbit hole.”—-

    I didn’t make that claim. I made the claim that (a) europeans invented scientific truth (promissory, performative, realism, naturalism, operationalism) because we were a purely military social order (militia), and that is military epistemology. And we invented sovereignty (every man is sovereign and none is above him ever). With truth and sovereignty you can only have our laws of sovereignty, tort, reciprocity and jury. Our sciences evolved from the application of our the logic of our laws to our understanding of the universe. So the only means of organizing our people was markets (competition). So we evolved genetically culturally institutionally and scientifically much, much, much faster than all other people combined – both in the prehistoric, in the ancient, and in the modern world. And when we are invaded we are as overwhelmed and fail like all other peoples fail. Because the bottom becomes too big for the top. I didn’t refer to your race (or any race) as farm animals. I said “We are just animals like our farm animals.” and we are self domesticated like we domesticated our farm animals. You might imply I stated others were farm animals when I stated all of us are indifferent from farm animals – domesticated. I you want to take that approach of misstating my words, I’ll say that every race, including whites, has ‘farm animals’ because we are all farm animals – but that some races have far more farm animals than they can raise out of ignorance, superstition, criminality, corruption, and poverty. That’s comical version of saying the same thing: we self domesticated. Which is what I say to all people in africa: there is nothing wrong with africa that six generations of one-child policy will not solve. This is africa’s only problem. It is not to say africans are inferior. it is to say that there are too many at the bottom for whom education in any technology is impossible. This is just statistics. it’s not possible for the bottom to join the advanced world that requires independent learning. and that’s what IQ does. above 105 you start to be able to learn how to repair machines by reading instructions on your own. This is the minimum ability for modern economic survival in a global economy. The problem for africa and for many countries outside of africa is that there are many, many, people that are below that number. This is why china modernized faster than say india, the middle east, and africa. Conversely, it is simply false to say that whites are not the most evolved genetic race, because we are the newest genetic race. We are just ten thousand years old. The primary difference in our race is a minor difference in agency (self control) because of substantial increase in neoteny (slowing the rate of maturity), that we evolved at the cost of emotional instability. Whites are less emotionally stable and more agreeable and introverted. Africans are less agreeable but more extroverted. These differences are small but there are differences. In general, inability to develop neoteny is the problem for the african races: the territory is extremely hostile because of the presence of disease – so rapid maturity was necessary for survival. This rapid maturity has consequences in behavioral development versus more neotenous races, which is well documented in the literature, and visible in all african populations. So between the geography, the distance from major trade routes, the vast size of the lower classes, and faster rates of maturity (and deeper maturity), and the lack of far eastern or western manorialism (eugenic farming) africa’s population distribution is less favorable to advanced development. That says nothing about individual africans and everything about the size of the classes in african countries. The only difference between the smartest africans (usually Ghana and Nigeria) and europeans jews and asians, is minor differences in our verbal and spatial abilities, and the rate at which we can continue learning into older age. However, it is not our best people that determine our fate. It is the number at the bottom that prevents the best people from improving the condition of the rest. Now don’t say you can’t understand that and therefore confirm everyone’s bias. ok? My job is to tell the truth that no one else will so that we solve the problem rather than develop cyclones of lies that just make us all angry.

  • On Farmers in The Division of Labor

    (The flip side of “I, Pencil”.) (probably an important lesson) Military(organization of territory) <> Judiciary (organization of cooperation-contract) <> Finance (organization of money(stored time)) <> Entrepreneurship (Organization of opportunity, capital, people) <> Professionals (organization of production(calculation)) <> Managers (Organization of people) <> Producers (Organization of resources) <> Distributors (organization of distribution) <> Trade (organization of transactions) <> Consumers (organization of consumption) <> Parents (organization of reproduction) <> teachers, priests, public intellectuals politicians ( sedation, facilitation, and amelioration of stress arising from scarcity, individual and familial irrelevance, and alienation in the division of labor upon which they depend.) Given the problem of “I,Pencil” (distribution of knowledge), an individual farmer has to input a lot of diverse knowledge and effort for low return on investment, in no small part because petroleum products, industrialization, fertilizer, feed were fully commoditized, and distribution. A farmer organizes primary resources (animals, food stuffs) and as such must be a skilled craftsman (organizers of specialized resources) at the very limit of craftsman’s capital (tools – no other craftsman requires so many tools). But the returns on the organization of resources are small – there are few multipliers. As you move up the production hierarchy you are responsible for organizing more and more and more people – where there are multipliers. This is why Marx is wrong. In order to organize people by rational incentives, one must produce marginal competitive differences by which to influence their choices. As such the entire difficulty in organizing production is organizing the human beings in a vast network to engage in it with nothing other than the bribe of doing the work (payment).

  • On Farmers in The Division of Labor

    (The flip side of “I, Pencil”.) (probably an important lesson) Military(organization of territory) <> Judiciary (organization of cooperation-contract) <> Finance (organization of money(stored time)) <> Entrepreneurship (Organization of opportunity, capital, people) <> Professionals (organization of production(calculation)) <> Managers (Organization of people) <> Producers (Organization of resources) <> Distributors (organization of distribution) <> Trade (organization of transactions) <> Consumers (organization of consumption) <> Parents (organization of reproduction) <> teachers, priests, public intellectuals politicians ( sedation, facilitation, and amelioration of stress arising from scarcity, individual and familial irrelevance, and alienation in the division of labor upon which they depend.) Given the problem of “I,Pencil” (distribution of knowledge), an individual farmer has to input a lot of diverse knowledge and effort for low return on investment, in no small part because petroleum products, industrialization, fertilizer, feed were fully commoditized, and distribution. A farmer organizes primary resources (animals, food stuffs) and as such must be a skilled craftsman (organizers of specialized resources) at the very limit of craftsman’s capital (tools – no other craftsman requires so many tools). But the returns on the organization of resources are small – there are few multipliers. As you move up the production hierarchy you are responsible for organizing more and more and more people – where there are multipliers. This is why Marx is wrong. In order to organize people by rational incentives, one must produce marginal competitive differences by which to influence their choices. As such the entire difficulty in organizing production is organizing the human beings in a vast network to engage in it with nothing other than the bribe of doing the work (payment).