(FB 1544203058 Timestamp) ( Working on writing courses is 10x more enjoyable than working on writing prose. … Just sayin’. Having a blast. )
Source: Original Site Post
-
Curt Doolittle shared a Page.
(FB 1544266409 Timestamp) CHRISTIANITY Just finished a talk with James Fox Higgins of The Rational Rise. (Damn, seriously love that man. Wonderful human.) In that discussion I think I have talked about my view of reforming christianity more so than any other public venue. The net of it is that christianity (and all our european religions for that matter) are compatible with natural law. Yet, it is christian tolerance that has made us vulnerable and is the reason we can be so easily undermined. The most intolerant wins, and we were not intolerante enough. So hence my advocacy of a very intolerant law. But a law that must somehow accommodate our traditional religion(s). He did bring up one interesting idea that (foolishly) hadn’t occurred to me: is our vulnerability as christians due to our failure to legislate christianity and thereby prevent other religions. The answer to which I think was yes. But taking it further, what would have happened if we had been smart enough to (a) legislate america as a christian country, (b) had used the jefferson bible as the definition of christianity, (c) and encoded the christian ethos (as I have), as well as (d) natural law of reciprocity (as I have)? In retrospect that would have been a very good thing. Now, i still hold the opinion that training in mindfulness by stoic (cognitive behavioral) method is superior to supernaturalism; that training in ‘sacredness’ by ‘church lesson, ritual, and oath’ is superior to any other method available to us because unlike schools it involves the whole family; that the model of jesus is excellent for teaching optimum cooperation; that the natural law can be taught in church – because the church advocated it; that it can be taught with sacredness not supernaturalism; and that the church did a much better job of educating the people than the state. I think these things are almost impossible to argue with. This is a very non-supernatural method of achieving christian ends. But it preserves the church(es) as the center of civil society and restores via-positiva to the moral discipline and limits the state to via-negativa actions. Thereby ending the means by which our civilization has been undermined.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544202197 Timestamp) (Followup Humor) CURT> Veronika, Um. Theoretical question: What would happen, if I hid your makeup bag so you couldn’t find it in the morning. Pretended I didn’t know anything about it, and then after you were exasperated put it back where it belonged. And you figured out really quickly it was me that hid it? Just …. scientific question…. lol VERONIKA> I always have âemergency oneâ. So I would just give you a look and leave the room ð ( Joy killer…. lol )
-
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
(FB 1544246689 Timestamp) SELF AUTHORING – SUPPRESSION OF MALINTUITION (suppression of the influence of cognitive biases) (repost) —“Q: Hey Curt, do you have a thought on the use of self-affirmations to create change in the self? For example, do you consciously talk positively with yourself with the intent on changing your own perception (personal narrative) ? Or do you think such a practice of positive self-affirmation can be used as an effective way of changing one’s personal narrative?”— Yes, that’s the essence of self authoring and stoicism is a formal approach to it. Yes it works. Although you can only change to what is true and good from what is false and not good. Most of the time I try to talk myself into either: 1 – ‘Be kind; be overly kind; they are only children, and doing the best they can in life.’ (It is very hard to control the autistic urge to anger and to punish perceived stupidity) or 2 – ‘Keep going no matter what, no matter how hard, you always win in the end” or 3 – “You can’t change that, and don’t need to, just do better in the future.” or 4 – “People think about you a lot less than you imagine, and generally better than you imagine, so don’t worry about it”. And those are things everyone probably needs to do. I don’t have the problem of ‘don’t take it personally’. I’m not agreeable enough to be affected by others. when they are wrong, only when I have been wrong. I have a lot of guilt about my occasionally losing tolerance for mortals and losing battle with my autism and hurting or disappointing people I care about; my divorce and one other relationship i should have handled better (i was very ill in both circumstances); underperforming for my investors. And the only one of those I can fix is my investors. cheers (edit) The only thing I would add is “What is the worst that can happen?” I think this is the advice people thank me for the most. If we are too concerned with failure to take risks that do not harm us,then we unnecessarily pass on opportunities for success. People forgive failure in pursuit of moral ends. failure in and of itself if costing nothing harmful or immoral is a good thing – we learn from it.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544198921 Timestamp) —“Curt: Post the covers of the ten books that most influenced you over the past ten years over 10 days. Tag me in your posts.”—Lance Kennedy You have me thinking here …. You know, books that affect you, books that helped you articulate ideas, and books you would recommend in retrospect are three different things. That which affects you is a function of your condition at the moment in development time and space. Books that are useful in your work are something else. Books that you would recommend to others would be something else yet again. Books that affected me more than any other were reading Encyclopedia Britannica and … (can’t remember the other one) all the way through three or four times… lol. There is a ‘pattern’ across the NPOV, and Western Tradition, and “Nobility” in which those books were written. And in retrospect I think it was that ‘education’ combined with study of war through the ages, and reading science fiction, that affected me most. Even today, the readiness of wikipedia, amazon, google scholar, and economic web sites – to find an idea and work through references is more influential than any given book. Why? Context. Contemporary education (by design) is context free in an attempt to undermine western civilization and it’s narrative, and therefore our moral and normative perpetuation of it. Teens it was 20th C Technology Mythology: – Time Enough For Love by Heinlein – Everything by Clarke – Everything by Bova and Ellison – A Wizard of Earthsea – Dune – Neuromancer and Snow Crash I find today, that people on ‘our side’ have abandoned the optimism of the technological era (sci fi) given our failures and have returned to the secular-theological era of the essayists (most commonly, the pessimism of nietzsche and evola and their anglo peers. Noticeably different from the hopefulness of the 20th c conservatives that ‘the left will learn’.) In college it was the study of art – without question – rewriting my mental image of mankind from military, technological, and scientific to artistic and civilizational was helpful, just as rewriting it into institutional, economic, and geographic was helpful. Just as rewriting it as what I call the grammars has been helpful. I might say that programming and designing software systems served me the way mathematics and logic did not – due to the operational logic of programming transforming the ideal to the real. I might say that Huntington, Hayek, Popper, Becker, and Hoppe, influenced my thought the most – but it wouldn’t be a single book – it would be learning how they thought by reading all their books. I might say that certain people’s works helped me a great deal: Hawkins on intelligence, Everyone’s IQ research, Everything by Simon Baron Cohen on autism and male-female brains, Haidt’s work in toto, Dawkins’ Selfish Gene, Diamond’s Third Chimp, and GST, everyone’s work on genetic history of man – particularly Reich’s new book. (What’s her name’s) book on mathematical philosophy. Olson’s on commons. Hick’s postmodernism definitely helped a great deal. Armstrong, Keegan, Mallory, and Todd on civilizational development helped. Nietzsche’s birth of tragedy was definitely a huge influence – even if I found it better to read ABOUT it by others, than in his own words translated into english – continental prose makes me intellectually gag. So what books influenced me most in the past ten years vs what books would I recommend over the past ten years, over what authors would I recommend over the past ten years…. hmmm… Well I’ll give that some thought, and see what I can post…. Thanks. 😉 (My recommended reading list is here: propertarianism.com/reading-list/
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544239779 Timestamp) There is a difference between serving women, and being in their service. I don’t feel “complete” without a woman to serve (make happy, care for, support). But I am not in the service of anyone but myself and my people. Women seem to find joy in attempting to put men into their service, but will despise those men if they are successful in doing so. You lose your entertainment value as vehicle for exercising feminine manipulation. 😉
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544281590 Timestamp) STYLE GUIDE: ATTRIBUTIONS “by” = Written by “h/t” = Forwarded, Recommended by “via” = Published on site, page, whatever… —“quote”—Author being quoted —myquote—Current Author So: THIS IS THE TITLE by John Doe, via His Web Site, h/t Mary Roe this_is_a_link … … ( FILE UNDER: FORMATTING OF POSTS )
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544196465 Timestamp) EMMANUEL TODD’S FAMILY STRUCTURES 1. Absolute Nuclear Family: a. Spouse selection: Free, but obligatory exogamy. b. Inheritance: Indifference – no precise rules, frequent use of wills. c. Family Home: no cohabitation of married children with their parents. d. Representative Nations, Peoples, Regions: Anglo-Saxon world, Holland, Denmark. e. Representative Ideology: Christianity, Capitalism, `Libertarian’ Liberalism, and Feminism.
- Egalitarian Nuclear Family:
a. Spouse selection: Free, but obligatory exogamy.
b. Inheritance: Egalitarian – equality between brothers.
c. Family Home: no cohabitation of married children with their parents.
d. Representative Nations, Regions: northern France, northern Italy, central & southern Spain, central Portugal, Greece, Romania, Poland, Latin America, Ethiopia.
e. Representative Ideology: Christianity (Catholicism); the “Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite” form of Liberalism. Authoritarian Family:
a. Spouse selection: Parents, little or no marriage between children of brothers.
b. Inheritance: Anti-Egalitarian – inequality between brothers, transfer of patrimony to one son.
c. Family Home: cohabitation of the married heir with his parents.
d. Representative Nations, Peoples, Regions: Germany, Austria, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, Bohemia, Scotland, Ireland, peripheral regions of France, northern (Basque) Spain, northern Portugal, Japan, Korea, Jews, Romany Gypsies.
e. Representative Ideology: Fascism, various separatist and autonomous (anti-universalist) movements.
4: Exogamous Community Family: a. Spouse selection: Parents, no marriage between the children of two brothers. b. Inheritance: Egalitarian – equality between brothers. c. Family Home: cohabitation of married sons with their parents. d. Representative Nations, Regions: Russia, Yugoslavia, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Hungary, Finland, Albania, central Italy, China, Vietnam, Cuba and north India. e. Representative Ideology: Communism, Socialism.
- Endogamous Community Family:
a. Spouse selection: Custom, frequent marriage between the children of brothers.
b. Inheritance: Egalitarian – equality between brothers.
c. Family Home: cohabitation of married sons with their parents.
d. Representative Nations, Peoples, Regions: Arab world, Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tadzhikistan.
e. Representative Ideology: Islam. Asymmetrical Community Family:
a. Spouse selection: Custom, prohibition on marriages between the children of brothers, but a preference for marriages between the children of brothers and sisters.
b. Inheritance: Egalitarian – equality between brothers.
c. Family Home: cohabitation of married sons with their parents.
d. Representative Regions: southern India.
e. Representative Ideology: Same
7: Anomic Family: a. Spouse selection: Free, but without obligatory exogamy; consanguine marriage possible and sometimes frequent. b. Inheritance: Indifference – uncertainty about equality between brothers, inheritance rules egalitarian in theory but uncertain in practice. c. Family Home: cohabitation of married children with parents rejected in theory but accepted in practice. d. Representative Nations, Peoples, Regions: e. Representative Ideology: Buddhism, Christianity, and Communism, but potentially anything.
- Egalitarian Nuclear Family:
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544238636 Timestamp) COLLECTION OF POSTS ON GENDER RELATIONS —“Curt, I am engaging with someone who could gain a fair amount of benefit form your breakdown of gender differences so I was hoping you could provide for me a collation of all that you have written on the matter.”— A Friend 1) Search function on propertarianism.com works pretty well actually. – If you go to the web site and search for ‘women’ you will get a pretty great selection of posts. – If you search for ‘female’ you will get the stuff on female ‘argument’.
– If you search for ‘Marriage’ you will get those posts. With those three searches (better to do them separately) you will get the compendium. (You will have to skip over some posts that are obviously unrelated, but not that many.) 2) The posts I’ve written since September on the subject…well you have to use the FB link until I post them to the site by using this link: https://www.facebook.com/search/top/?q=curt%20doolittle%20women%20female&epa=FILTERS&filters=eyJycF9hdXRob3IiOiJ7XCJuYW1lXCI6XCJhdXRob3JcIixcImFyZ3NcIjpcIjc0MTE5NzI2M1wifSIsInJwX2Nocm9ub19zb3J0Ijoie1wibmFtZVwiOlwiY2hyb25vc29ydFwiLFwiYXJnc1wiOlwiXCJ9In0%3D 3) I don’t know if Brandon Hayes has a ‘thread’ where he has capture male-female relations, but if he does he will probably comment here in response with a link. -
Curt Doolittle shared a link.
(FB 1544269251 Timestamp) PROPERTARIAN CORE – READ ALOUD (Reposting) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNZcz9gw4ig&has_verified=1