—“Curt purposely writes for (very) high-IQ people who have a lot of contextual understanding already in place. Some of his stuff is difficult for me and I’m 135-140 (some of it I have to make an effort to “get” which I’m not accustomed to). That being said Curt’s posts/writing have gotten a lot more accessible over time IMO. But some of it can’t be simplified all that much or too much important detail is lost. At the same time, many of the key insights and their ramifications I believe can be explained to avg IQ audiences (maybe even sub-100 if communicated well) in basic form. Some detail will be lost in that process, but it will be valuable for normal folks to understand the basic what & why, while all the detail will be available to the high IQ men who will be implementing it (ruling). Curt has said before that he is relying on people in the 130-140 range to carry his ideas down the IQ range.”—John Mark
Source: Original Site Post
-
“Curt purposely writes for (very) high-IQ people who have a lot of contextual un
—“Curt purposely writes for (very) high-IQ people who have a lot of contextual understanding already in place. Some of his stuff is difficult for me and I’m 135-140 (some of it I have to make an effort to “get” which I’m not accustomed to). That being said Curt’s posts/writing have gotten a lot more accessible over time IMO. But some of it can’t be simplified all that much or too much important detail is lost. At the same time, many of the key insights and their ramifications I believe can be explained to avg IQ audiences (maybe even sub-100 if communicated well) in basic form. Some detail will be lost in that process, but it will be valuable for normal folks to understand the basic what & why, while all the detail will be available to the high IQ men who will be implementing it (ruling). Curt has said before that he is relying on people in the 130-140 range to carry his ideas down the IQ range.”—John Mark
-
The Basis of Community Is Self Interest
The underlying basis of community is self interest, and the production of commons because commons provide returns for self interest. It is, as far as I know, not possible to contradict morality as stated in propertarianism (reciprocity) since it is both a logical necessity and empirically evident in all judicial proceedings known to man.
-
The Basis of Community Is Self Interest
The underlying basis of community is self interest, and the production of commons because commons provide returns for self interest. It is, as far as I know, not possible to contradict morality as stated in propertarianism (reciprocity) since it is both a logical necessity and empirically evident in all judicial proceedings known to man.
-
Natural Law Facism = Market Fascism
That is (a) universal, (b) nationalist, (c) reciprocity (d) forcing markets in everything, (e) free of imposition of costs directly or indirectly, (f) and extreme intolerance for the opposites: internationalism, irreciprocity, discretionary rule over common and private. I’ve gone “full fash”. In the sense of militaristic, expansionist, zero tolerance for anything other than sovereignty, reciprocity, truth, duty, and markets in everything.
-
Natural Law Facism = Market Fascism
That is (a) universal, (b) nationalist, (c) reciprocity (d) forcing markets in everything, (e) free of imposition of costs directly or indirectly, (f) and extreme intolerance for the opposites: internationalism, irreciprocity, discretionary rule over common and private. I’ve gone “full fash”. In the sense of militaristic, expansionist, zero tolerance for anything other than sovereignty, reciprocity, truth, duty, and markets in everything.
-
Monotheistic Differences in Demand for Thruth
We are taught to tell the truth no matter the consequences. Judaism teaches that deceit is acceptable with non-jews. Islam teaches to lie whenever advantagous.
-
Monotheistic Differences in Demand for Thruth
We are taught to tell the truth no matter the consequences. Judaism teaches that deceit is acceptable with non-jews. Islam teaches to lie whenever advantagous.
-
Punishing Free Riders Begins Early
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618779061?journalCode=pssa—“… children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders … “— (Via James Santagata) “Human flourishing depends on individuals paying costs to contribute to the common good, but such arrangements are vulnerable to free riding, in which individuals benefit from others’ contributions without paying costs themselves. Systems of tracking and sanctioning free riders can stabilize cooperation, but the origin of such tendencies is not well understood. Here, we provide evidence that children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders. Across six studies, we showed that these tendencies are robust, large in magnitude, tuned to intentional rather than unintentional noncontribution, and generally consistent across third- and first-party cases. Further, these effects cannot be accounted for by factors that frequently co-occur with free riding, such as nonconforming behaviors or the costs that free riding imposes on the group. Our findings demonstrate that from early in life, children both hold and enforce a normative expectation that individuals are intrinsically obligated to contribute to the common good.” http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618779061?journalCode=pssa& -
Punishing Free Riders Begins Early
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618779061?journalCode=pssa—“… children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders … “— (Via James Santagata) “Human flourishing depends on individuals paying costs to contribute to the common good, but such arrangements are vulnerable to free riding, in which individuals benefit from others’ contributions without paying costs themselves. Systems of tracking and sanctioning free riders can stabilize cooperation, but the origin of such tendencies is not well understood. Here, we provide evidence that children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders. Across six studies, we showed that these tendencies are robust, large in magnitude, tuned to intentional rather than unintentional noncontribution, and generally consistent across third- and first-party cases. Further, these effects cannot be accounted for by factors that frequently co-occur with free riding, such as nonconforming behaviors or the costs that free riding imposes on the group. Our findings demonstrate that from early in life, children both hold and enforce a normative expectation that individuals are intrinsically obligated to contribute to the common good.” http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618779061?journalCode=pssa&