(FB 1547483001 Timestamp) NORMIE VERSION OF “WHAT IS PROPERTARIANISM?” (via Bill and Curt) Propertarianism is a method – it’s the completion of the scientific method, and that scientific method applied to EVERYTHING – including language, psychology, social science, economics, politics and group competitive strategies. So while propertarianism consists of the completion of the scientific method, what results from that scientific method, is scientific law, and scientific government, which makes it possible for us to cooperate in the post industrial era. And the benefit of scientific law and scientific government is that it ends parasitism and deceit in politics economics and law, and provides scientific solutions to the conflicts of politics economics and law. In the broader historical sense, propertarianism completes the greco-anglo empirical program to complete the sciences, and to eliminate bias, wishful thinking, deception, superstition, idealism, and pseudoscience from the the public discourse that we call ‘the informational commons”.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547573280 Timestamp) Yes, it is more work to speak truthfully. It is more work to produce that engage in theft, and more work to engage in theft than parasitism. With every increase in the incremental suppression of parasitism by ‘means I can get away with because the exchange is voluntary’ those people who create parasitism object. When you disagree with me all you are saying is that you want to preserve your means of parasitism, or your means of exporting costs to the commons, just like any other thief or fraud.
-
(FB 1547476850 Timestamp) THE MOST USEFUL MAP OF THE WORLD. (Add the rivers and
(FB 1547476850 Timestamp) THE MOST USEFUL MAP OF THE WORLD. (Add the rivers and you’re there.)
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547572164 Timestamp) IN DEFENSE OF THE DEMAND FOR DUE DILIGENCE IN PUBLIC SPEECH, AND THE PUNISHMENT OF FALSE SPEECH. by John Mark (must read) (central argument) 1 – It is too difficult to teach Bullsh-t detection to masses of people with heavy biases and an avg IQ of 85-105 (depending on the nation). Half or more of the population (below 105-106) cannot tell what is true or not even if they try. The solution is not teaching; it won’t work. The solution is punishment. (Law) 2 – Allowing lying allows left-instinct people to rally using lies and false promises. It’s a Dangerous thing to allow. Too dangerous. 3 – Most people will have to refrain from making public pronouncements about matters which they have not done due diligence. This would be wonderful. 4 – You only have the “rights” you & your friends can defend. If someone wants to defend their “right” to be wrong, they are fighting in favor of lies against truth. (I will not be joining that team.) 5 – “More free speech” has failed. Because lying is faster, cheaper, easier than telling the truth. There is a world of difference between what the Left does (arbitrary, enforcing lies) & what we propose (scientific, enforcing truth). “The way most people want to live”…the left wants to pretend lies are true; the Right benefits from truth and wants the results of truth. The Right is better served by enforcing truth (punishing lies) than by allowing lies or “free speech” (aka lies winning). 6 – There would be more court cases for a while and then as people figure out what the consequences of their actions will be, the # of cases will drop significantly.
- John Mark
-
(FB 1547476616 Timestamp)
(FB 1547476616 Timestamp) https://brilliantmaps.com/religion-world-map/
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547571421 Timestamp) AGENCY AND INTENTIONALITY by Bill Joslin (important concept)(core) (comments by CurtD) Test of Agency does not require intention (i.e. it’s not a synonym for free-will). Agency, in the context of biological and chemistry does not imply or require intentionality. i.e. “The active agent in soap is lye” This might clarify why the sociological definition of Agency, that being an actor’s ability to act outside of influences of Structure, is flawed (it presumes intentionality exists as a necessary component of agency i.e. acts of free will unfettered by structure) My stance regarding agency is simply this: …the ability to cause an effect…. (CurtD: Traditional definition of power, is “the ability to alter the probability of outcomes.”) In this context, structural influences can be the very means by which agency emerges and increases (rather then being distinguished apart from it) From here: the issue we are discussing when discussing limitations to agency within a sociology context relates to other actors (individual or institutional) which act in opposition to other agents. Thus my definition of AUTONOMY as being free from imposition upon one’s agency BY OTHER ACTORS. (Rather then natural or structural limitations to agency). Intentionality remains a subset of agency in this regards. Not a necessary component. (CurtD: Via Positiva Agency and Via Negativa Autonomy produce market competition for action. Intention (subjective value) is not relevant to the facts of ones agency and one’s autonomy) For example: in law intention is not the primary means by which guilt is established. There are circumstances where intention is not relevant i.e. manslaughter, criminal neglect etc. (CurtD: In law we test for due diligence and liability and intent to commit a crime only tangentially. In other words we separate the TRUTH (due diligence and liability), from what is MORAL (intent).) So for instance, the impact on society from a low IQ cohort is not a matter of lacking agency, but rather that their aggregate agency constitutes a net negative – their combined effect being a result of their agency, regardless of intentionality or deliberateness of their actions- no agency, no effect – no intentionality yet the effect remains. (CurtD: people do not need to intend harm to cause harm. When they cause harm by lack of due diligence, or intent, then THEY are to blame. But if they lack the AGENCY then WE are to blame for not constraining the harm that they can do.) It’s is precisely because of their agency that we seek constraints. Why? Because their agency imposes upon other actors resulting in a net drain on the agency of the group as a whole…. Thus autonomy being the measure of decidability. Why is this important? Because for laws, social norms etc, we are constructing structural limitations upon agents, to constrain their effects from being damaging (regardless of whether they intend it or not). In other words we are addressing their agency, their ability to cause an effect – regardless of their intentional choice. So how do these structural constraints NOT constitute an imposition upon their agency? 1) via negativa 2) not compelled. You are free to break the law (act outside the constraint) but not free from the consequences. The potential to act remains un-imposed upon. This is very different than imposing upon agency to prevent the acts from taking place. I.e. compelled behaviour. Compelled behavior being a defining quality of dystopian nightmares. Now extrapolated this to our current situations of sin taxes, compelled speech laws, deplatforming etc. These are all forms of prescriptive application of structural constraints i.e. impositions upon agency… (CurtD: this is the difference between moral blame and criminal blame, and humans being what we are, conflate ‘wrongness’ of different sorts, and blame of different persons when we sense ‘wrongness’. Then as we are perpetual victims of our tendency for conflation we use terms with specific meaning (moral, lawful, truthful, logical, reasonable etc to load and frame rather than to deflate and test.) -Bill Joslin
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547468764 Timestamp) WORDS IN RUSSIAN BUT NOT IN ENGLISH TELL US A LOT ABOUT RUSSIAN EMOTIONAL NORMATIVITY
- Poshlost
Russian-American writer Vladimir Nabokov, who lectured on Slavic Studies to students in America, admitted that he couldnât translate this word, which every Russian easily understands. - Nadryv
German Wikipedia has an entire article dedicated to the word nadryv (надÑÑв). This is a key concept in the writings of Russian writer Fyodor Dostoevsky. The word describes an uncontrollable emotional outburst, when a person releases intimate, deeply hidden feelings. - Khamstvo
Soviet émigré writer Sergei Dovlatov wrote about this phenomenon in the article “This Untranslatable Khamstvo,” commenting that “Khamstvo is nothing other than rudeness, arrogance and insolence multiplied by impunity.”
What is poshlost (поÑлоÑÑÑ)? Nabokov gives the following example: “Open any magazine and youâll certainly find something like this – a family just bought a radio (a car, a refrigerator, silverware, it doesn’t matter), and the mother is clapping her hands, mad with joy, the children gathered around her with their mouths agape; the baby and the dog are leaning towards the table on which the `idolâ has been hoisted⦠a bit to the side victoriously stands the father, the proud breadwinner. The intense “poshlosity” of such a scene comes not from the false exaggeration of the dignity of a particular useful object, but from the assumption that the greatest joy can be bought and that such a purchase ennobles the buyer.” “This word includes triviality, vulgarity, sexual promiscuity and soullessness,” added the late Professor Svetlana Boym from Harvard University. Moreover, Dostoevsky’s nadryv implies a situation in which the protagonist indulges in the thought that he can find in his soul something that may not even exist. That’s why the nadryv often expressed imaginary, excessively exaggerated and distorted feelings. One part of the novel, Brothers Karamazov, is called “Nadryvs.” In Dovlatov’s view, itâs with impunity that khamstvo (Ñ Ð°Ð¼ÑÑво) outright kills us. It’s impossible to fight it; you can only resign yourself to it. “I’ve lived in this mad, wonderful, horrifying New York for ten years and am amazed by the absence of khamstvo. Anything can happen to you here, but thereâs no khamstvo. You can be robbed but no one will shut the door in your face,” added the writer.
- Stushevatsya
Some linguists believe stushevatsya (ÑÑÑÑеваÑÑÑÑ) was introduced by Fyodor Dostoevsky, who used it for the first time in a figurative sense in his novella, The Double. This word means to be less noticeable, go to the background, lose an important role, noticeably leave the scene, become confused in an awkward or unexpected situation, become meek. Toska
This Russian word can be translated as “emotional pain,” or “melancholy,” but this does not transmit all of its depth. Vladimir Nabokov wrote that, “Not one word in English can transmit all the nuances of toska (ÑоÑка). This is a feeling of spiritual suffering without any particular reason. On a less dolorous level, itâs the indistinct pain of the soulâ¦vague anxiety, nostalgia, amorous longing.”Bytie
This word comes from the Russian byt'(to exist). In Russian-English dictionaries this philosophical concept is translated as “being.” However, bytie (бÑÑие) is not just life or existence, itâs the existence of an objective reality that is independent of human consciousness (cosmos, nature, matter).Bespredel
Eliot Borenstein, professor of Slavic Studies at New York University, explains that bespredel (беÑпÑедел) literally means “without restrictions or limits.” Translators often use “lawlessness” (bezzakonie). In Russian, however, the meaning of bespredel is much broader, and refers to the behavior of a person who violates not only the law, but also moral and social norms.Avos’
Itâs rather difficult to explain to people of other nationalities what this means. Interestingly, many people believe that avos’ (авоÑÑ) is the main Russian national trait. Hoping for the avos’ means doing something without planning, without putting in much effort, counting on success.Yurodivy
Yurodivy: Russian ‘Umberto Eco’ demystifies the Holy Fool Yurodivys (ÑÑодивÑе) in ancient Rus’ were people who voluntarily renounced earthly pleasures in the name of Christ. Such people looked like madmen, and led a wandering lifestyle with the aim of obtaining inner peace and defeating the root of all sin – pride. They were valued and were considered close to God. Their opinions and prophecies were taken into consideration and they were even feared.
- Podvig
This word is often translated into English as “feat” or “achievement,” but it has other meanings. Podvig (подвиг) is not just a result, or the achievement of an objective; itâs a brave and heroic act, an action performed in difficult circumstances. Russian literature often mentions military, civilian podvigs and even scientific podvigs. Moreover, this word is a synonym for selfless acts, for example, a podvig in the name of love.
- Poshlost
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547570431 Timestamp) WE HAVE A HIGHER STANDARD OF TRUTH —“I think this is the fatal flaw of propertarianism. It’s an unnecessary step to go this far if you already have parasite proof governance.”–Daniel It is not a bug or a flaw but a feature and it is by design. No, we have a higher standard of ‘lying’ – higher standard in that in matters of the commons you lie for having not done due diligence, not by intention. We are testing whether you performed due diligence, against harm, not whether you intended to harm. The purpose is to prevent both the originator of the lie and the propagators of the lie, just as we prevent the thief, and those who profit from the works of the thief. We are extending the defense of property from goods and services to information. This is necessary because desirable lies and harmful information spreads faster and more cheaply under industrialized distribution of information than true and beneficial information. And it is by desirable lies that the first abrahamic dark age of the abrahamic religions, and the Jewish, Muslim, Marxist, postmodernist, feminist, attempt to create the second abrahamic dark age, have been created, and spread – lies.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547468418 Timestamp) Thank you John Mark, for all you are doing for us.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547521982 Timestamp) ( Love you all. 😉 )