Source: Original Site Post

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547143620 Timestamp) —“Logic and definitions are obviously tools of oppression invented by white hetero normative cis males”—Greg Hamilton

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547246518 Timestamp) SO WHAT DOES GA BRING TO DERRIDA’S TABLE? All I see is a series of publications using hand waving as an attempt to provide a pseudoscientific defense of Derrida, in that ‘well’ everything evolved from language therefore we can evolve anything with language. In other words, postmodernism. GA tells us nothing that we don’t already know. So, what is it that GA brings to the table? What can we deduce from it? What application can we put it to? What purpose does this theory solve? I understand language as consisting of continuous recursive production of transactional measurements and linguistic competition for demonstrated results as improving measurements (truth) and biasing measurements (frauds and deceits). Whether a cliff or a climb is irrelevant. The central problem is one of computational costs in that production versus time and energy costs of that production. In other words, language tends to be pragmatically adjusted for precision over time, given the context. So what? That means we can tell truth and lie. It means that competitive ability highly reflects linguistic precision. It means that competitive ability provides competitive advantage. Because otherwise physical marginal indifference provides too little competitive advantage. So what does postmodern literary drivel bring to an otherwise well understood table? What I hear is that ‘its a useful means of manipulating people by deceit.’ People lacking knowledge, power, achievement, and capital like the priests of the middle east attempting to destroy the empire with christianity judaism and islam. Lies are a competitive strategy. The entire abrahamic artifice is based upon the competitive utility of lying.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547246629 Timestamp) There is no wisdom literature that is not false, that cannot be broken in to operational, fully accounted language.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547143486 Timestamp) THE ATHENIAN TRADITION DID NOT ACCOUNT FOR COSTS… (worth repeating) The athenian tradition did not account for costs. There are two principle reasons for it: (1) the peerage was small and wealthy with common interests – and costs were as rude then as today (2) discussion of costs immediately changes from ideals to reals thereby self selecting into class interests (3) mathematical idealism influenced greco-roman thought so heavily, giving such sophism an unearned legitimacy. (4) historically religion spoke in these ideal terms, philosophy an improvement upon them, and empiricism an improvement upon philosophy, and science an improvement upon empiricism, just as ‘Testimonialism’ is an improvement upon science. (empiricism vs science distinguished by the 20th’s implementation of operational language, and testimonialism by the completion of the scientific method). It is time for philosophy to either abandon idealism, sophism, and the ignorance of costs, or to be further demoted into the theology of ideals.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547244310 Timestamp) LIES OF RIGHT ABSOLUTISTS AND LEFT ABSOLUTISTS ARE STILL JUST LIES – AN ADMISSION OF FAILURE. The difference between this article and some bit of occult nonsense by Evola is simply the flavor of sophism. No one disputes that language makes possible a multitude of paradigmatic lies of coercion, but it makes only one most parsimonious paradigmatic truth of decidability. The Pretense of Wisdom in the Tempo of Syllables, and the power of suggestion by loading and framing inarticulate and untestable prose. “Woo Woo” for the post-theological era. Science requires knowledge. “Woo” takes advantage of ignorance. Leftist or right lies are indifferent. No one disputes the relationship between consciousness and language – only the degree. It still does not justify that the history of man is a long filter of anthropocentric perception and intuition as we gradually eliminate ignorance, error, bias and deceit – despite the priests. Termination of lies and liars regardless of herd or pack is in the interest of both herd and pack. https://thejournalofneoabsolutism.wordpress.com/2017/05/02/the-anthropoetics-of-power/

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547246518 Timestamp) SO WHAT DOES GA BRING TO DERRIDA’S TABLE? All I see is a series of publications using hand waving as an attempt to provide a pseudoscientific defense of Derrida, in that ‘well’ everything evolved from language therefore we can evolve anything with language. In other words, postmodernism. GA tells us nothing that we don’t already know. So, what is it that GA brings to the table? What can we deduce from it? What application can we put it to? What purpose does this theory solve? I understand language as consisting of continuous recursive production of transactional measurements and linguistic competition for demonstrated results as improving measurements (truth) and biasing measurements (frauds and deceits). Whether a cliff or a climb is irrelevant. The central problem is one of computational costs in that production versus time and energy costs of that production. In other words, language tends to be pragmatically adjusted for precision over time, given the context. So what? That means we can tell truth and lie. It means that competitive ability highly reflects linguistic precision. It means that competitive ability provides competitive advantage. Because otherwise physical marginal indifference provides too little competitive advantage. So what does postmodern literary drivel bring to an otherwise well understood table? What I hear is that ‘its a useful means of manipulating people by deceit.’ People lacking knowledge, power, achievement, and capital like the priests of the middle east attempting to destroy the empire with christianity judaism and islam. Lies are a competitive strategy. The entire abrahamic artifice is based upon the competitive utility of lying.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547242782 Timestamp) EVERYTHING ROTHBARD SAYS IS A LIE

    1. Rothbard and Hoppe always start with some artificial moral license to property rather than that property produces a division of labor that is more rewarding than predation (for the able) and is the only reason for the able to cooperate, and the only means of cooperation at scale.
    2. In the Free Rider Problem, the answer is that if you are a free rider you are consuming opportunity and resources that could by replaced by those who DO contribute to the commons that they benefit from. This is in fact what people demonstrably do: outcast free riders.

    3. We inherit the investments of our ancestors we do not free ride upon them because they are ours by inheritance, in exchange for persisting the genes, civilization, culture and investments of those previous generations, just as we hope following generations will preserve ours.

    4. —“must therefore be supplied outside the free market, by the coercive force of the government”– No, it is because it is an unsubstitutable good. There is no restitution for lost life nor substitution for risk of life. NONE.

    … I can’t even continue refuting rothbard because it makes me so angry that we have lost two generations to (((more lies))). EVERYTHING ROTHBARD SAYS IS A (((LIE))) DEFENDED BY A HALF TRUTH, AND APPEAL TO REASONABLENESS. …. EVERYTHING. YES, ….. EVERYTHING. Rothbard is only useful in so far as we can study his excellence at Straw Manning, Undue Praise, Pilpul and Critique, and by that study, understand why we moral men are vulnerable to that category of (((lies))). It’s just lies. ROTHBARD IS JUST (((A LIAR))) THAT SUCKERS MIDDLE CLASS YOUNG MEN, LIKE MARXISM WORKING CLASS MEN, LIKE POSTMODERNISM WOMEN AND NON-MEN. Everything he says is false. Study rothbard to learn how to lie, so that we can end lying to our people.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547244310 Timestamp) LIES OF RIGHT ABSOLUTISTS AND LEFT ABSOLUTISTS ARE STILL JUST LIES – AN ADMISSION OF FAILURE. The difference between this article and some bit of occult nonsense by Evola is simply the flavor of sophism. No one disputes that language makes possible a multitude of paradigmatic lies of coercion, but it makes only one most parsimonious paradigmatic truth of decidability. The Pretense of Wisdom in the Tempo of Syllables, and the power of suggestion by loading and framing inarticulate and untestable prose. “Woo Woo” for the post-theological era. Science requires knowledge. “Woo” takes advantage of ignorance. Leftist or right lies are indifferent. No one disputes the relationship between consciousness and language – only the degree. It still does not justify that the history of man is a long filter of anthropocentric perception and intuition as we gradually eliminate ignorance, error, bias and deceit – despite the priests. Termination of lies and liars regardless of herd or pack is in the interest of both herd and pack. https://thejournalofneoabsolutism.wordpress.com/2017/05/02/the-anthropoetics-of-power/

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547242138 Timestamp) One can have an interests in the criminally obtained, or the reciprocaly obtained, or obtained by homesteading (creating). Potential Property consists in those interests that have been obtained under the natural law of reciprocity. Property by norm consists of that which others agree not to impose costs upon. Property rights consist of that which is not only norm but insured by a third party to whom you may appeal for enforcement. It is not JUST that one demonstrates property by what he defends – he demonstrates INTEREST by what he defends, but he cannot defend an interest that which was produced by crime or deceit without violating the natural law of reciprocity. I think what seems circular to you is that you’re not starting with reciprocity first, then evolving property from it, and instead, trying to (impossibly) evolve reciprocity from interest. Reciprocity > demonstrated interest > agreement on scope (property) > insurance of scope (rights)

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1547242782 Timestamp) EVERYTHING ROTHBARD SAYS IS A LIE

    1. Rothbard and Hoppe always start with some artificial moral license to property rather than that property produces a division of labor that is more rewarding than predation (for the able) and is the only reason for the able to cooperate, and the only means of cooperation at scale.
    2. In the Free Rider Problem, the answer is that if you are a free rider you are consuming opportunity and resources that could by replaced by those who DO contribute to the commons that they benefit from. This is in fact what people demonstrably do: outcast free riders.

    3. We inherit the investments of our ancestors we do not free ride upon them because they are ours by inheritance, in exchange for persisting the genes, civilization, culture and investments of those previous generations, just as we hope following generations will preserve ours.

    4. —“must therefore be supplied outside the free market, by the coercive force of the government”– No, it is because it is an unsubstitutable good. There is no restitution for lost life nor substitution for risk of life. NONE.

    … I can’t even continue refuting rothbard because it makes me so angry that we have lost two generations to (((more lies))). EVERYTHING ROTHBARD SAYS IS A (((LIE))) DEFENDED BY A HALF TRUTH, AND APPEAL TO REASONABLENESS. …. EVERYTHING. YES, ….. EVERYTHING. Rothbard is only useful in so far as we can study his excellence at Straw Manning, Undue Praise, Pilpul and Critique, and by that study, understand why we moral men are vulnerable to that category of (((lies))). It’s just lies. ROTHBARD IS JUST (((A LIAR))) THAT SUCKERS MIDDLE CLASS YOUNG MEN, LIKE MARXISM WORKING CLASS MEN, LIKE POSTMODERNISM WOMEN AND NON-MEN. Everything he says is false. Study rothbard to learn how to lie, so that we can end lying to our people.