Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • Fields, Not Ideals, Truths, Or Favorites

    —“What are people’s take on the Fermi paradox? Like what is most likely scenario anyone have their own theory on it?”—Sam McPhail

    [T]he question is rather strange – because of the odd human desire for certainty. As far as I know there are a field of possibilities, and we simply do not know. Some of us are able to tolerate fields of possibilities, and some of us are unable to tolerate fields of possibilities. As far as I know this behavior is driven by the feeling of whether one is in or out of control of one’s circumstances, and this conflation exists because we humans lack the ability to compartmentalize: our brain can literally associate anything with anything, which is only productive until it’s not.

  • Fields, Not Ideals, Truths, Or Favorites

    —“What are people’s take on the Fermi paradox? Like what is most likely scenario anyone have their own theory on it?”—Sam McPhail

    [T]he question is rather strange – because of the odd human desire for certainty. As far as I know there are a field of possibilities, and we simply do not know. Some of us are able to tolerate fields of possibilities, and some of us are unable to tolerate fields of possibilities. As far as I know this behavior is driven by the feeling of whether one is in or out of control of one’s circumstances, and this conflation exists because we humans lack the ability to compartmentalize: our brain can literally associate anything with anything, which is only productive until it’s not.

  • The False Dichotomy Of Capitalism vs Socialism is Another Abrahamic Deception

    The Anarchism(impossible) to Capitalism(rule of law universalism) to classical liberalism(rule of law nationalism ) to National Socialism to communism (impossible, universalism) is another bit of sophistry sold by the abrahamic left: whereas the difference is one of rule of law vs rule by discretion. So, as usual in the abrahamic method of deceit, the public is presented with a false dichotomy, between two economic models where all economies are and must be mixed economies, and where the debate is only over the rule of law that forces cooperative solutions , and rule of man, which forces uncooperative solutions. The Romans solved this problem by preserving the senate (aristocracy), and the middle classes (plebeians) during times of market cooperation, and dictators (generals) in time of war. As far as I know there is no better system than authority in war, houses in peace, and redistribution of windfalls. And all of that is possible only when the law is empirical and sacred, and men will willingly kill usurpers at every opportunity.

  • The False Dichotomy Of Capitalism vs Socialism is Another Abrahamic Deception

    The Anarchism(impossible) to Capitalism(rule of law universalism) to classical liberalism(rule of law nationalism ) to National Socialism to communism (impossible, universalism) is another bit of sophistry sold by the abrahamic left: whereas the difference is one of rule of law vs rule by discretion. So, as usual in the abrahamic method of deceit, the public is presented with a false dichotomy, between two economic models where all economies are and must be mixed economies, and where the debate is only over the rule of law that forces cooperative solutions , and rule of man, which forces uncooperative solutions. The Romans solved this problem by preserving the senate (aristocracy), and the middle classes (plebeians) during times of market cooperation, and dictators (generals) in time of war. As far as I know there is no better system than authority in war, houses in peace, and redistribution of windfalls. And all of that is possible only when the law is empirical and sacred, and men will willingly kill usurpers at every opportunity.

  • Rule of Law vs Government – Deconflation

    [R]ule of Law is Rule of Law ( prohibitions, via-negativa ) regardless of the form of Government (actions, requirements, via-positiva). The only necessary function of law is the resolution of disputes. The only necessary function of government is the production of commons. In a democracy individuals vote on those commons recommended by whom? A king? A bureaucracy? Any proposed by anyone? In a republic, individuals vote for representatives who then vote on those commons. Dictator/Monarchy, Cabinet, (Representatives) Bureaucracy, People. European Parliaments like thangs and juries were originally juries, where the monarchy would petition local landowners (businesspeople) if they wished to tax them for some purpose or not. The battle over via negativa control Rule of Law vs Rule by DIscretion), and the limits of exception on rule of law vs rule by discretion, and the distribution of via-positiva rule between monarch(nation)/dictator(empire), oligarchy/parliament (intermediary between state and people), and the people, has continued. As far as I know the form of government is dependent upon the demographic distribution of the people (relative sizes of the classes), their state of development (size of the middle classes), scale of territory, and hostility and competitiveness of neighbors. If we want an ideal government – at least, the one possible by man – we probably had it: small homogenous nation states, rule of law by the natural (necessary) law of reciprocity (tort, trespass), an hereditary monarch as judge of last resort, a cabinet of professionals acting largely as venture capitalists, a small professional bureaucracy, preferably trained in the aristocratic (private secular), church or confucian model from youth. Via Negativa voting by the people in matters of taxation. And (what is causing most of our 19th-20thc problems) universal standing before the court in matters of the commons. This creates a political market for commons, a productive market for goods services and information, and a juridical market for prosecution of ir-reciprocity regardless of whether private or public.

  • Rule of Law vs Government – Deconflation

    [R]ule of Law is Rule of Law ( prohibitions, via-negativa ) regardless of the form of Government (actions, requirements, via-positiva). The only necessary function of law is the resolution of disputes. The only necessary function of government is the production of commons. In a democracy individuals vote on those commons recommended by whom? A king? A bureaucracy? Any proposed by anyone? In a republic, individuals vote for representatives who then vote on those commons. Dictator/Monarchy, Cabinet, (Representatives) Bureaucracy, People. European Parliaments like thangs and juries were originally juries, where the monarchy would petition local landowners (businesspeople) if they wished to tax them for some purpose or not. The battle over via negativa control Rule of Law vs Rule by DIscretion), and the limits of exception on rule of law vs rule by discretion, and the distribution of via-positiva rule between monarch(nation)/dictator(empire), oligarchy/parliament (intermediary between state and people), and the people, has continued. As far as I know the form of government is dependent upon the demographic distribution of the people (relative sizes of the classes), their state of development (size of the middle classes), scale of territory, and hostility and competitiveness of neighbors. If we want an ideal government – at least, the one possible by man – we probably had it: small homogenous nation states, rule of law by the natural (necessary) law of reciprocity (tort, trespass), an hereditary monarch as judge of last resort, a cabinet of professionals acting largely as venture capitalists, a small professional bureaucracy, preferably trained in the aristocratic (private secular), church or confucian model from youth. Via Negativa voting by the people in matters of taxation. And (what is causing most of our 19th-20thc problems) universal standing before the court in matters of the commons. This creates a political market for commons, a productive market for goods services and information, and a juridical market for prosecution of ir-reciprocity regardless of whether private or public.

  • Watch: John Mark on RECIPROCITY!

    New Video by John Mark!!  Reciprocity in Normie Language.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EItVNVP_6yo  

  • Watch: John Mark on RECIPROCITY!

    New Video by John Mark!!  Reciprocity in Normie Language.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EItVNVP_6yo  

  • Jordan Peterson’s Health

      Yes Peterson’s in a clinic to get off Klonopin (Clonazepam). Yes he had a reason to get on it (terminal cancer diagnosis of his wife). Yes his wife has rather miraculously survived. Yes he will be fine. The reason to go to clinics if you can afford it, is to reduce the burden of care on your family, and to insulate them from your behavior as you go thru withdrawal. Jordan may have low agreeableness, but he is still a very sensitive person, and his career, like that of actors, trains one to be even more sensitive. And so it’s not wonder he sought help (and could afford it.) Testimony Of Shared Experience: I am very similar to Jordan in age, ability, personality, sentiment, and conviction. And because of undiagnosed cancer, doctors thought I was depressed, and was on Clonazepam for years. I quit cold turkey when I realized what it was doing to me. And, while I have many times the willpower and pain tolerance of normal people, it was a brutal physical and emotional experience – including visual auras, panic attacks, hypersensitive nerves, overactive startle response. I can’t imagine what it’s like for normal people. My wife was amazing. I prepared her expectations for it beforehand. I don’t think it took more than about six weeks but I could be wrong. I vaguely remember the effects sticking with me by popping up now and then for months whenever I was under stress. I can still have an overactive startle response when I’m concentrating for long periods. And so, I would not ask a woman recovering from Mrs Peterson’s near death experience to carry the burden of my withdrawal at a time when she needed caretaking herself. I don’t think i’ve been quite right again since getting off it. And I still take an OCD prescription – for more than twenty years – and I don’t know if it’s because of my low level autism, or the consequences of that experience with Clonazepam. (Or the trauma of multiple bouts of cancer, divorce, and related life changes.) I have no idea. I actually don’t mind my OCD. But other people do. ‘Cause my tolerance for illogical speech drops to zero – and my ability to switch contexts does as well. I don’t like being a robot and that’s what happens. Anyway. My sympathies.

  • Jordan Peterson’s Health

      Yes Peterson’s in a clinic to get off Klonopin (Clonazepam). Yes he had a reason to get on it (terminal cancer diagnosis of his wife). Yes his wife has rather miraculously survived. Yes he will be fine. The reason to go to clinics if you can afford it, is to reduce the burden of care on your family, and to insulate them from your behavior as you go thru withdrawal. Jordan may have low agreeableness, but he is still a very sensitive person, and his career, like that of actors, trains one to be even more sensitive. And so it’s not wonder he sought help (and could afford it.) Testimony Of Shared Experience: I am very similar to Jordan in age, ability, personality, sentiment, and conviction. And because of undiagnosed cancer, doctors thought I was depressed, and was on Clonazepam for years. I quit cold turkey when I realized what it was doing to me. And, while I have many times the willpower and pain tolerance of normal people, it was a brutal physical and emotional experience – including visual auras, panic attacks, hypersensitive nerves, overactive startle response. I can’t imagine what it’s like for normal people. My wife was amazing. I prepared her expectations for it beforehand. I don’t think it took more than about six weeks but I could be wrong. I vaguely remember the effects sticking with me by popping up now and then for months whenever I was under stress. I can still have an overactive startle response when I’m concentrating for long periods. And so, I would not ask a woman recovering from Mrs Peterson’s near death experience to carry the burden of my withdrawal at a time when she needed caretaking herself. I don’t think i’ve been quite right again since getting off it. And I still take an OCD prescription – for more than twenty years – and I don’t know if it’s because of my low level autism, or the consequences of that experience with Clonazepam. (Or the trauma of multiple bouts of cancer, divorce, and related life changes.) I have no idea. I actually don’t mind my OCD. But other people do. ‘Cause my tolerance for illogical speech drops to zero – and my ability to switch contexts does as well. I don’t like being a robot and that’s what happens. Anyway. My sympathies.