—“Curt, I would like to extract from your comments the following sentences:
– “People pay the cost of patriotism when it is in their interest, either to seize an opportunity or to prevent a harm”.
– “The incentive is intuitied by some. But in this interregnum, the market for various incentives has caused a bifurcation”.
I appreciate your insistence on keeping our feet on the ground and avoid any fancy or Romantic dreams. Nevertheless, don’t you think that Propertarianism needs a vision of an ideal – an animating or vital principle – over and beyond science and self-interest, in order to secure sufficient public acceptability?
Europe? Neo-Enlightenment? European, Western Renaisssance? Civilization?”— Daniel Gurpide
Daniel,
This is a profoundly important question, because (a) almost all inspirational visions offer something for a discount, and it is that discount that we feel when inspired – and I am intellectually forbidden from such discounts (thefts); (b) because I have put my primary efforts into the combination of truth and material gains to be obtained through the restoration of truth and violence in order to ‘sell’ those who do not share our values, such that inspiration does not matter; (c) And that I am not sure at the moment which of the grand visions provides the greatest coverage. But certainly the combination of preventing another dark age, preventing our genocide, restoring our civilization, creating the greatest civilization yet to be, by restoring our civilization to the principal force of human transcendence into gods that may dominate the universe.
Now, because men form tribes it is more important to create a portfolio of ‘wins’ that tribes will seek to achieve, than a single idea. And a portfolio of Ideas offers greater survivability.
In the end though, I just see it as boring science: either we wll do it or the civilization that has been the source of man’s transcendence will be eradicated.
And evolution and the universe do not give us but one chance.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Western aristocracy requires an enemy. We have one: our own secular priesthood
Western aristocracy requires an enemy. We have one: our own secular priesthood. -
Western aristocracy requires an enemy. We have one: our own secular priesthood
Western aristocracy requires an enemy. We have one: our own secular priesthood. -
“Some people are satisfied with having “truth” bestowed upon them by another ind
—“Some people are satisfied with having “truth” bestowed upon them by another individual, institution, or superstition. Other people, themselves concerned with truth are not satisfied when it is bestowed upon them. They will try to falsify everything until only what is true remains.”— Adam Walker -
“Some people are satisfied with having “truth” bestowed upon them by another ind
—“Some people are satisfied with having “truth” bestowed upon them by another individual, institution, or superstition. Other people, themselves concerned with truth are not satisfied when it is bestowed upon them. They will try to falsify everything until only what is true remains.”— Adam Walker -
(diary) broke my brain today. I cannot afford to take the time to dive even deep
(diary) broke my brain today. I cannot afford to take the time to dive even deeper into the topology of meaning. And even if I do, I think that is a completely different project. As far as I know, I will not make a meaningful improvement upon operational grammar by getting down into the geometry of that level of complexity. So even though that evil machine in my head obsesses over it, I’m at the point of diminishing returns. The end result of going deeper will be contributing the the development of artificial intelligence, and not law. And while I really want to explore that problem, all I will do is justify operational grammar. and I really don’t think it requires justification. I am better off working at the level of programming languages than mathematics, because that is the lowest level that is applicable to the outcomes. And frankly, I don’t think anyone gives a damn if I go deeper. So, at least today, I am going to fight my autistic machine and just say that I’m leaving that level of detail for later work. And I can spend my old age working on it if I want to – unless someone gets there first. Ergo, I am going to try to complete the work now using this level of precision and bear the criticism of any formalists by saying that I just can’t take another two or three years to work through that level of detail. -
(diary) broke my brain today. I cannot afford to take the time to dive even deep
(diary) broke my brain today. I cannot afford to take the time to dive even deeper into the topology of meaning. And even if I do, I think that is a completely different project. As far as I know, I will not make a meaningful improvement upon operational grammar by getting down into the geometry of that level of complexity. So even though that evil machine in my head obsesses over it, I’m at the point of diminishing returns. The end result of going deeper will be contributing the the development of artificial intelligence, and not law. And while I really want to explore that problem, all I will do is justify operational grammar. and I really don’t think it requires justification. I am better off working at the level of programming languages than mathematics, because that is the lowest level that is applicable to the outcomes. And frankly, I don’t think anyone gives a damn if I go deeper. So, at least today, I am going to fight my autistic machine and just say that I’m leaving that level of detail for later work. And I can spend my old age working on it if I want to – unless someone gets there first. Ergo, I am going to try to complete the work now using this level of precision and bear the criticism of any formalists by saying that I just can’t take another two or three years to work through that level of detail. -
For Newbs
—“You always go in hard and soften up. It is fascinating to watch.”— Andy Curzon Andy has been a partner in my investigations for years now. And while I wasn’t going to call this out, I think its important for newbies to understand why I am such a relentless critic of some of our most cherished ideas. He means that the way I investigate the truth and value of an idea is by attempting to exhaustively falsify it. And the veracity of my attacks on any given subject are continued evidence of my commitment to falsification. Meaning, that I do not treat anything as a truth candidate unless *I have no other alternative*. There is a grain of truth in almost anything. But finding that potential needle in any given haystack generally requires burning the haystack to the ground so that only the metal remains. Truth is unforgiving. But once I have discovered that grain of truth – for example, the secret of western adaptive velocity, or the secret of christianity – or in the failure of the 20th century philosophers to discover operational epistemology – then I no longer need to attack the subject and can then be forgiving of our many mortal failures. This is important since it takes a great deal of intellectual honesty to perform this kind of work – few of us are emotionally able to – and it takes a great deal of character and intellectual honest to follow such investigations. Investigations that dismantle your cherished values. So if you are going to come along on this journey, it might help to understand, that there is an extremely important method to my antagonisms. But that once an investigation is done, we move on. -
For Newbs
—“You always go in hard and soften up. It is fascinating to watch.”— Andy Curzon Andy has been a partner in my investigations for years now. And while I wasn’t going to call this out, I think its important for newbies to understand why I am such a relentless critic of some of our most cherished ideas. He means that the way I investigate the truth and value of an idea is by attempting to exhaustively falsify it. And the veracity of my attacks on any given subject are continued evidence of my commitment to falsification. Meaning, that I do not treat anything as a truth candidate unless *I have no other alternative*. There is a grain of truth in almost anything. But finding that potential needle in any given haystack generally requires burning the haystack to the ground so that only the metal remains. Truth is unforgiving. But once I have discovered that grain of truth – for example, the secret of western adaptive velocity, or the secret of christianity – or in the failure of the 20th century philosophers to discover operational epistemology – then I no longer need to attack the subject and can then be forgiving of our many mortal failures. This is important since it takes a great deal of intellectual honesty to perform this kind of work – few of us are emotionally able to – and it takes a great deal of character and intellectual honest to follow such investigations. Investigations that dismantle your cherished values. So if you are going to come along on this journey, it might help to understand, that there is an extremely important method to my antagonisms. But that once an investigation is done, we move on. -
The Ship Of Theseus
The question (riddle) is designed to confuse the difference between a necessary truth and a useful reference. In human language identity = differentiation (five senses), ownership (property), substitutability (restitution), scarcity( countability), possibility, permissibility. If one uses the word “is” in a philosophical question you know you’re the victim of deception. If one proposes a question in operational language then no paradoxes exist. If we clone the ship the referent remains the same. If we replace the ship’s constituent parts and no not restore them to original condition, then it’s the same referent. In other words, we develop these reference to via negativa prevent error and deception. The identity (referent) of the ship is established by first construction (homesteading). Just as ownership is established by first conversion( homesteading). Ergo, empirically, humans treat referents as property, and abuse of referents as a form of theft (deception.)