Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post.

    (FB 1546284026 Timestamp) DEFINING QUALITY OF THE WEST’S SUCCESS Increasing precision, resolution and conciseness results in packed terms which when understood provide decidibility. Increasing ambiguity, obfuscation and verbosity results in overloaded terms which when unpacked contain little substance. The former an investment with dividends, the later malinvestment which causes damage. Western civ = disambiguation across domains, scales and orders of complexity

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546348761 Timestamp) (From Twitter: putting an end to Nassim Taleb’s insight, edited a bit for clarity) WARNING: this is part of an ongoing debate on twitter between Molyneux and Taleb on intelligence and it is a controversial topic for Facebook. Unfortunately, this is a debate that must occur because is of profound importance for humanity – our values are not always survivable. Hence I’m sharing only with ‘Friends’. Nassim (all), IQ describes a curve. East and west are superior for having culled underclass reproduction, while center have failed to cull underclass reproduction. So, to reverse your statement: “I can understand loving one’s people, and apologizing for one’s people, but denying the science is quite sinister.” Other ‘peoples’ are ‘inferior’ (meaning poorer) socially, economically, politically, and militarily because of Pareto problem created by the size of their lower classes in relation to their upper classes. Hence continuous middle eastern failure under underclass religion and rule. Despite the wealth of possessing the optimum trade routes, the middle east was unable to fix this problem. Stephan is Correct. IQ (meaning, the relative size of genetic classes as measured by rate of learning), is the MOST important factor in group wealth. PERIOD. This is because trust and trustworthiness increase in concert with cognitive ability. Nassim: Your ‘admiration’ for a certain class of individuals is unscientific as well: they and their behavior are why no large corporations, and only smaller (inefficient) organizations. Our ‘clerical’ education and society, is why we HAVE large (efficient) corporations. In other words YOU ARE DESPERATELY WRONG. Relative wealth = demographics. Nassim, so if you hadn’t taken up this particular issue it wouldn’t have made me pay attention to, and understood, the catastrophic error in your conflation of individual speculators and the political orders in which wealth potential of such people is possible. YOU ARE WRONG. Nassim: The west, despite beginning with Aryanism (sovereignty and tort law), and Aristotelianism (empiricism), SURVIVED the first wave of Semiticism (Abrahamism) because of genetic reserves. Every other civilization that has tolerated Semiticism has been destroyed by the continuous expansion of the underclasses.We are in the process of not-surviving the second wave of Semiticism. Nassim: So I just unfortunately realized that your FatTony et all, sensibility is just Semitic hatred of high trust peoples who produce their extraordinary wealth by the production of COMMONS. And this insight, if widely understood will destroy your reputation even further. You think that our high-trust people, are ‘suckers’ when it is precisely that social order and those values that allow us to produce the commons that make high returns possible, while those historical peoples you (out of racial bias) favor, were NEVER ABLE TO, because of ‘petty profiting’ that you favor.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546366049 Timestamp) I wanna talk to Molly about doing a smack down on Taleb. The community would benefit from this discussion. I would like to cover taleb’s original insight, and how he is applying it outside it’s limits, and in doing so largely deflate his IQ position, illustrate why he’s just talking pseudoscience to justify his racial biases, while reinforcing his via-negativa argument as a general rule. It’s not that difficult but it will be better to have molly’s popularity and my arguments together because they will flatten Taleb on this issue. Can anyone contact someone who can try to arrange this?

  • Curt Doolittle wrote on Oksana Kavetska’s timeline.

    (FB 1546310599 Timestamp) happy new year!!!!

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546365506 Timestamp) —“How did we go from 500 cc to 1500 cc brains? 2 million years of iterative genocide.”– Simon Ström

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546309655 Timestamp) PLEASE UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS MEANS —“It was a good year for wealth creation. It was a tough year in financial markets, but for people who are creating wealth through companies, the economy itself is very strong.”— Michael Zeuner, managing partner of WE Family Offices.

  • Curt Doolittle wrote on Ely Harman’s timeline.

    (FB 1546612854 Timestamp) Happy birthday! 😉

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546464567 Timestamp) null. resetting default publication to public.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546611466 Timestamp) PUTTING YOUR TRUST IN ONE GOVERNMENT ORDER OR ANOTHER? You have to choose whether to trust the self interest of the judicial ‘priesthood’, the self interest of the monarchy, the self interest of the ruling oligarchy, or the self control of the democratic polity, or the self interests of public intellectuals. My argument is that you can’t trust any of them, and that the judicial priesthood benefits from ‘maintaining the rules of the game’, but if and only if the military will back them up. Why? The judiciary is a purely via-negativa discipline: it advocates nothing, and only resolves conflicts. It is already privileged. It is already high status. It is operationally selective (failure is quickly obvious and resolved), and failure of members is against the interest of the whole, who police it well through hierarchical review. The central issue in limiting the judiciary and preserving its freedom from via-positiva action, is nothing more than insufficiently enumerated terms of decidability. And that’s what i’ve done. Provided that completeness. -Curt Doolittle

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546464457 Timestamp) —“Curt, is your field (philosophy) art or science?”— Francesco Principi As I understand my work, given that science is an extension of the law, these are the three options: 1) Law, Sciences(Logics/Mathematics), Measurements. -vs- reality, competition, and testimony w/ warranty THE TRUE (EXISTENTIAL/REAL) – I consider this a ‘a science’. -vs- 2) Philosophy, Literature, History, -vs- sophism, justification, and deceit w/o warranty THE IDEAL – I consider this an ‘art’. -vs- 3) Theology, Scripture, Mythology -vs- supernaturalism, authoritarianism, and deceit w/o warranty THE FANTASY(IMAGINARY) – i consider this a ‘fraud or deceit’ In other words, I am not sure that the old versions of these terms have any meaning. I consider philosophy that which is yet unsolved in the narrow sense, OR the imagination of possible worlds (fantasy literature) in the broader sense. So in the narrow sense I see philosophy closed (completed), and what was philosophy of ‘the big questions’ are solved. In the broad sense of imagining and reconstructing relations that we might prefer or that might be good, there will never be an end to that category of philosophizing. As far as I know theorizing about the true and possible has replaced philosophizing, and theorizing completely under testimonialism has replaced the limited theorizing of the 19th and 20th century sciences. So I tend to say I am a philosopher of natural law because it is all people can understand in the historical context of the available term. But, technically speaking, what I understand that I am doing is the science of the law. Which in itself I think is what natural law must eventually mean. Where natural law and the laws of nature are separated only by conscious choice. And so I don’t see any difference between science and law other than warranty. And as we have seen, science without warranty of due diligence is largely pseudoscience. and pseudoscience is just another term for fraud. So as I understand it, truth = law, and all else are sub-grammars of that law if that is all that is required to solve that problem, or deciets that violate that law. 1) The Physical Laws (invariability), 2) the Natural Law (decidability), 3) History, and Literature (meaning), … … are the only non-false domains and methods of inquiry remaining. Drug addicts defend their habits. There are many ways of drugging the mind. Lies are the most common of them. And stoicism, family, oath-feast-festival, and our nation of all those that came before, all those that are, and all those that are yet to be, are the cure for that addiction.