(Same as rejecting Jordan Peterson’s Darwinian Truth) (Same as rejective Mathematical Idealism) (Same as rejecting all fictionalisms – ‘Conveniences’)
Source: Original Site Post
-
Rejecting Brett Weinstein’s Metaphorical Truth
(Same as rejecting Jordan Peterson’s Darwinian Truth) (Same as rejective Mathematical Idealism) (Same as rejecting all fictionalisms – ‘Conveniences’)
-
—“I have a few questions if you don’t mind.”—
—“I have a few questions if you don’t mind.”— 1) –“Besides Ostrom, what can I read if I want to understand more of the commons?”– Honestly, I don’t think there is else much worth reading. I would read the history of the common law which is in my book list. And I would read my definition of property in toto. 2) –“Who would you consider influential in the Chicago school for the insurer of last resort argument for the state?”– Becker and Friedman. Becker for method, and Friedman for Solutions, Hayek for integration with law, Coase for institutions. Just go thru the list of famous people from Chicago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_school_of_economics 3) —“And lastly, where can I read more on the proposed propertarian financial/monetary/banking system?”— I haven’t categorized (tagged) that group of ideas on the site, so it’s spread all over the place. I can’t spend 30 minutes doing a bunch of searches right now but I can think of a few that might be helpful. But understand, this is a very small part of the program: 1) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/12/10/whats-your-position-on-ubi-welfare-2-0/ 2) ***DE-FINANCIALIZATION: Definancialization of the Financial System. There is no reason we pay interest on consumer loans (and every reason we pay it on business and industrial loans). By nationalizing Mastercard, and issuing one every LEGAL AND FULLY INTEGRATED citizen, we can distribute liquidity (increase the money supply) by direct redistribution to the citizenry (in which case our homes would all be paid for because of the last recession), and consumer loans can be provided directly from the treasury. Furthermore, by professionalizing ‘banking’ (basically requiring series 7 for issuing loans via the treasury, and licensing as we do CPA’s), we can eliminate consumer interest, and cut payment periods in half or to one third. Additionally we make universities carry the zero interest loans on behalf of any student, and to obtain payment as a payroll deduction over a period of no more than ten years. This combination will mean that after about 15 years, the first time home owner will own his home free and clear, and the universities will no longer be able to offer junk degrees. I won’t go into the various extraordinary (wonderful) other consequences but this will restore the american people’s way of life and destroy the predatory financial, academic, and government sectors. There will be no other way to profit than the Silicon Valley (monarchy) model of investment in research, development, and industry. Financialism will be destroyed forever.*** 4) —“If I understand correctly, you’re proposing 100% reserves under fiat,”— No, you must publish your ratios at all times, and hold to any ratio whenever a debt was initiated. You many not transfer originated debt. You can sell interest in that debt but must carry it. And lastly, given that most consumer lending would be from the treasury and without interest, this would apply largely to commercial relations. 5) —“while having at least two if not more parallel monies, one for savings (probably a gold standard) and one as a means of exchange (fiat e-cash),”— Multiple monies in general. I think my view is of far more than two. 6) —-With savings and investments happening under private banks while current accounts controlled by central bank). Is that correct?”—- I see individual agents having relationships with the central bank for consumer credit, and very little need for them, without a bank as an intermediary. -
—“I have a few questions if you don’t mind.”—
—“I have a few questions if you don’t mind.”— 1) –“Besides Ostrom, what can I read if I want to understand more of the commons?”– Honestly, I don’t think there is else much worth reading. I would read the history of the common law which is in my book list. And I would read my definition of property in toto. 2) –“Who would you consider influential in the Chicago school for the insurer of last resort argument for the state?”– Becker and Friedman. Becker for method, and Friedman for Solutions, Hayek for integration with law, Coase for institutions. Just go thru the list of famous people from Chicago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_school_of_economics 3) —“And lastly, where can I read more on the proposed propertarian financial/monetary/banking system?”— I haven’t categorized (tagged) that group of ideas on the site, so it’s spread all over the place. I can’t spend 30 minutes doing a bunch of searches right now but I can think of a few that might be helpful. But understand, this is a very small part of the program: 1) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/12/10/whats-your-position-on-ubi-welfare-2-0/ 2) ***DE-FINANCIALIZATION: Definancialization of the Financial System. There is no reason we pay interest on consumer loans (and every reason we pay it on business and industrial loans). By nationalizing Mastercard, and issuing one every LEGAL AND FULLY INTEGRATED citizen, we can distribute liquidity (increase the money supply) by direct redistribution to the citizenry (in which case our homes would all be paid for because of the last recession), and consumer loans can be provided directly from the treasury. Furthermore, by professionalizing ‘banking’ (basically requiring series 7 for issuing loans via the treasury, and licensing as we do CPA’s), we can eliminate consumer interest, and cut payment periods in half or to one third. Additionally we make universities carry the zero interest loans on behalf of any student, and to obtain payment as a payroll deduction over a period of no more than ten years. This combination will mean that after about 15 years, the first time home owner will own his home free and clear, and the universities will no longer be able to offer junk degrees. I won’t go into the various extraordinary (wonderful) other consequences but this will restore the american people’s way of life and destroy the predatory financial, academic, and government sectors. There will be no other way to profit than the Silicon Valley (monarchy) model of investment in research, development, and industry. Financialism will be destroyed forever.*** 4) —“If I understand correctly, you’re proposing 100% reserves under fiat,”— No, you must publish your ratios at all times, and hold to any ratio whenever a debt was initiated. You many not transfer originated debt. You can sell interest in that debt but must carry it. And lastly, given that most consumer lending would be from the treasury and without interest, this would apply largely to commercial relations. 5) —“while having at least two if not more parallel monies, one for savings (probably a gold standard) and one as a means of exchange (fiat e-cash),”— Multiple monies in general. I think my view is of far more than two. 6) —-With savings and investments happening under private banks while current accounts controlled by central bank). Is that correct?”—- I see individual agents having relationships with the central bank for consumer credit, and very little need for them, without a bank as an intermediary. -
Fulfilling Your Needs
The reason you want a narrative and an ideology is so that you can feel in a group and in control in a world where you have none. But the only control you have is over your understanding of that world and your interpretation of that world. So narratives are inhibitors not enablers. Propertarianism (Natural Law) will absolutely positively provide you with a consistent, correspondent, and coherent science, grammar, and logic with which to understand describe and interact with the world. Stoicism (Self authoring in goals and virtues) will absolutely positively provide you with the mindfulness to control your interpretation of that world. Restoration of our historical civilization to sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, truth, and markets in all aspects of life will allow us to achieve our individual interests within the limits of available knowledge and resources, as well as defend ourselves from primitive competitors, and if necessary conquer and govern them, and if left no other choice, to eliminate them.
-
Fulfilling Your Needs
The reason you want a narrative and an ideology is so that you can feel in a group and in control in a world where you have none. But the only control you have is over your understanding of that world and your interpretation of that world. So narratives are inhibitors not enablers. Propertarianism (Natural Law) will absolutely positively provide you with a consistent, correspondent, and coherent science, grammar, and logic with which to understand describe and interact with the world. Stoicism (Self authoring in goals and virtues) will absolutely positively provide you with the mindfulness to control your interpretation of that world. Restoration of our historical civilization to sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, truth, and markets in all aspects of life will allow us to achieve our individual interests within the limits of available knowledge and resources, as well as defend ourselves from primitive competitors, and if necessary conquer and govern them, and if left no other choice, to eliminate them.
-
The Existence of Gods.
No. You don’t get it. Gods exist the way Socrates (Historically), Siegfried(Mythically), and Gandalf(Fictionally) exist. Given that enough people study the wisdom of that mythos that emotional and intellectual norms develop from the ‘ritualization’, those gods exist in effect on our behavior if not in cause. These gods function as a standard of measurement at our most intuitionistic and most universal scale. Sympathy with shared experience and Synchronicity due to universal subjectivity to the same temporal streams of information, achieves what we consider supernatural, but is simply the consequence the culmination of patterns of behavior in concert with momentary information. I talk to gods every day. For the technique to work, whether with the god, a therapist, a friend, or yourself, you must be unable to lie in the role-play (prayer). If you can manage emotional and intellectual honesty with any god (collectively shared pattern of values), then you can obtain the benefit of the character’s frame of reference. The reason being that it is extremely hard for us to be intellectually honest with ourselves, and the act of speaking whether external or internal, forces continuous recursive disambiguation, which forces our brains to test our thoughts, just as we test our thoughts while we are speaking to others and anticipating their responses. By and large this system works extraordinarily well. If you combine that with self authoring and the virtues and select characters from history to represent those virtues and goals, and if you read enough about those people, you will in fact, obtain their wisdom through role playing discourse (prayer) – assuming you can practice intellectual honesty. Now, some of us lack the agency for this and this is why we have doctrine. But admission that you require doctrine is admission that you lack the agency to call yourself fully human. This is acceptable as long as you do not claim to possess the agency necessary to influence the decisions of others. And as such those of us who have agency must police those that do not, such that those who do not possess agency do not attempt to spread their lack of it.
-
The Existence of Gods.
No. You don’t get it. Gods exist the way Socrates (Historically), Siegfried(Mythically), and Gandalf(Fictionally) exist. Given that enough people study the wisdom of that mythos that emotional and intellectual norms develop from the ‘ritualization’, those gods exist in effect on our behavior if not in cause. These gods function as a standard of measurement at our most intuitionistic and most universal scale. Sympathy with shared experience and Synchronicity due to universal subjectivity to the same temporal streams of information, achieves what we consider supernatural, but is simply the consequence the culmination of patterns of behavior in concert with momentary information. I talk to gods every day. For the technique to work, whether with the god, a therapist, a friend, or yourself, you must be unable to lie in the role-play (prayer). If you can manage emotional and intellectual honesty with any god (collectively shared pattern of values), then you can obtain the benefit of the character’s frame of reference. The reason being that it is extremely hard for us to be intellectually honest with ourselves, and the act of speaking whether external or internal, forces continuous recursive disambiguation, which forces our brains to test our thoughts, just as we test our thoughts while we are speaking to others and anticipating their responses. By and large this system works extraordinarily well. If you combine that with self authoring and the virtues and select characters from history to represent those virtues and goals, and if you read enough about those people, you will in fact, obtain their wisdom through role playing discourse (prayer) – assuming you can practice intellectual honesty. Now, some of us lack the agency for this and this is why we have doctrine. But admission that you require doctrine is admission that you lack the agency to call yourself fully human. This is acceptable as long as you do not claim to possess the agency necessary to influence the decisions of others. And as such those of us who have agency must police those that do not, such that those who do not possess agency do not attempt to spread their lack of it.
-
Sin?
—“Hey Curt, I’ve got a question for you. I was wondering what your thoughts are on the abrahamic concepts of “sin” and “evil”. What are sin and evil to the Aryan, and how is it relevant to natural law?”— A Friend Um. Well, sin is nonsense right? The accumulation of knowledge of your possibility of exposure and punishment is not nonsense, because it is inevitably written on our face and in your body language and in how people treat you. So the only equivalent would be your Character (virtues). As to evil, the ancient meaning remains correct: Transgression (aggression against, imposition against) —“The modern English word evil (Old English yfel) and its cognates such as the German Übel and Dutch euvel are widely considered to come from a Proto-Germanic reconstructed form of *ubilaz, comparable to the Hittite huwapp- ultimately from the Proto-Indo-European form *wap- and suffixed zero-grade form *up-elo-. Other later Germanic forms include Middle English evel, ifel, ufel, Old Frisian evel (adjective and noun), Old Saxon ubil, Old High German ubil, and Gothic ubils. The root meaning of the word is of obscure origin though shown[7] to be akin to modern German Das Übel (although evil is normally translated as Das Böse) with the basic idea of transgressing.[8]”— I distinguish the following: |Moral| good > amoral > exchange > criminal > unethical > immoral > evil Where Evil refers to intending harm without even profiting from it.
-
Sin?
—“Hey Curt, I’ve got a question for you. I was wondering what your thoughts are on the abrahamic concepts of “sin” and “evil”. What are sin and evil to the Aryan, and how is it relevant to natural law?”— A Friend Um. Well, sin is nonsense right? The accumulation of knowledge of your possibility of exposure and punishment is not nonsense, because it is inevitably written on our face and in your body language and in how people treat you. So the only equivalent would be your Character (virtues). As to evil, the ancient meaning remains correct: Transgression (aggression against, imposition against) —“The modern English word evil (Old English yfel) and its cognates such as the German Übel and Dutch euvel are widely considered to come from a Proto-Germanic reconstructed form of *ubilaz, comparable to the Hittite huwapp- ultimately from the Proto-Indo-European form *wap- and suffixed zero-grade form *up-elo-. Other later Germanic forms include Middle English evel, ifel, ufel, Old Frisian evel (adjective and noun), Old Saxon ubil, Old High German ubil, and Gothic ubils. The root meaning of the word is of obscure origin though shown[7] to be akin to modern German Das Übel (although evil is normally translated as Das Böse) with the basic idea of transgressing.[8]”— I distinguish the following: |Moral| good > amoral > exchange > criminal > unethical > immoral > evil Where Evil refers to intending harm without even profiting from it.