[T]HE THEORETICAL HIERARCHY OF ORGANIZATIONAL EVOLUTION (useful idea) 4 – LAW: Customers, Brand, Channels, and Income Stream, Predictability 3 – THEORY: Innovation (business model), Investment, Possibility 2 – HYPOTHESIS: Talent, Effort, Searching For A Business Model 1 – FREE ASSOCIATION: Idea (Free Association) All human endeavors follow this principle just as most physical evolutionary organisms follow the “fibonacci, golden ratio, nautilus” sequence. The evolution of business is no different from the evolution of any other field of knowledge except that time is one’s enemy, competition is brutal, and testing is ever-present and inescapable. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine
Source: Original Site Post
-
Women Have No More Place In Politics and War Then Men In Childbearing and Midwifery
[M]en have had a much harder time taming women’s irrationality and impulsivity than they have their own. We kill off troublesome men. We just constrain troublesome women. We spent tends of thousands of years incrementally suppressing male behavior while merely containing female behavior. But we turned the ballot box into Pandora’s box and let loose all the evils in the world. Men have no more place in midwifery and nursery than women have in politics and war.
-
Women Have No More Place In Politics and War Then Men In Childbearing and Midwifery
[M]en have had a much harder time taming women’s irrationality and impulsivity than they have their own. We kill off troublesome men. We just constrain troublesome women. We spent tends of thousands of years incrementally suppressing male behavior while merely containing female behavior. But we turned the ballot box into Pandora’s box and let loose all the evils in the world. Men have no more place in midwifery and nursery than women have in politics and war.
-
The First Form Of Capital: Time And Violence
(very important) [T]ime is amoral. It is put either to good ends or bad. Violence is amoral. It is either put to good ends or bad. Money is amoral. It is either put to good ends or bad. Law is amoral. It is put to either good ends or bad. Action is amoral. It is put to either good ends or bad. Violence is however, the first capital upon which all other capital is constructed and preserved. If you lack violence-capital, lack legal capital, lack economic capital, and lack territorial capital, you lack cultural capital, and lack genetic capital. The origin of wealth is not trade, it is violence used to prohibit non trade.
-
The First Form Of Capital: Time And Violence
(very important) [T]ime is amoral. It is put either to good ends or bad. Violence is amoral. It is either put to good ends or bad. Money is amoral. It is either put to good ends or bad. Law is amoral. It is put to either good ends or bad. Action is amoral. It is put to either good ends or bad. Violence is however, the first capital upon which all other capital is constructed and preserved. If you lack violence-capital, lack legal capital, lack economic capital, and lack territorial capital, you lack cultural capital, and lack genetic capital. The origin of wealth is not trade, it is violence used to prohibit non trade.
-
I Don’t Want To Disenfranchise Anyone
[A] market for consumer goods and a market for commons both benefit from producers and consumers. But I am an Aspie. I hate conflict. I don’t shun from it. That would be immoral. But I hate it none the less. I grew up in an environment so horrible that no one would envy it. And my dream world consists of one in which we compete but there is no conflict. And our current governmental structure, which evolved to suit middle class merchants and agrarians who needed to find a way to allocate scarce resources in order to create necessary commons, is completely inadequate for an era in which the American empire consists of various regions and subcultures put into conflict by constant social engineering – the only purpose of which appears to maintain the bureaucracy and american international military power. We can make a better world. Truth, Contract, Market Government, Regionalism.
-
I Don’t Want To Disenfranchise Anyone
[A] market for consumer goods and a market for commons both benefit from producers and consumers. But I am an Aspie. I hate conflict. I don’t shun from it. That would be immoral. But I hate it none the less. I grew up in an environment so horrible that no one would envy it. And my dream world consists of one in which we compete but there is no conflict. And our current governmental structure, which evolved to suit middle class merchants and agrarians who needed to find a way to allocate scarce resources in order to create necessary commons, is completely inadequate for an era in which the American empire consists of various regions and subcultures put into conflict by constant social engineering – the only purpose of which appears to maintain the bureaucracy and american international military power. We can make a better world. Truth, Contract, Market Government, Regionalism.
-
Actually, I’m Not An Atheist
(important piece) (on the existence of gods)
—“You’re one of my favorite Catholic Atheists”—
[W]ell, thank you. Although, while a scientist, I am not an atheist. I am just what is called a Naturalist, and not a Supernaturalist. I understand that Gods exist. They exist as numbers exist. If I was an atheist you wouldn’t catch me praying (talking to god) regularly. Which I do. Often. I just have a very esoteric concept of the nature of a god’s existence. And I separate the existence of gods from primitive notions of religion. I am not sure what the difference is between a supernaturally existential deity, and a worldwide knowledge of socrates, or a regional knowledge of a saint, or a local knowledge of ancestors, and praying to the knowledge of that personality, and those memories, for love, support, advice, and counsel. For various reasons I am fairly certain prayer ‘works’. I am fairly certain gods ‘work’. I am fairly certain that gods, ritual, and prayer are a competitive advantage. And whether one chooses to explain away all of this scientifically as psychology, or accept it metaphysically, or embody it supernaturally, is merely a function of one’s abilities, biases, and preferences. As far as I know gods exist as numbers exist, and gods ‘work’ for the same reason numbers work. There are consequences to the existence and use of numbers that transcend human abilities to perceive and conceptualize. If you construct various axioms, the resulting patterns can be rich sources of information – especially when combined with new experiences. If you construct stories of gods, heroes and saints there is no difference. So as far as I know, the study of gods, heroes and saints literally reconstructs them in your mind, and you can ask them questions if you learn how. It is even more useful to do the same with one’s ancestors since you carry not only those ideas but their genes, and the biases and benefits that they passed down to you. Our ancestors thought in physicality or spirituality because they did not have the concept of INFORMATION that is the model we use today to understand the physical world. And it is INFORMATION that economists, philosophers and behaviorists such as myself use as the model for describing the human world, and not spirituality or physicality. I have no idea if information in my head, yours, and others, interacts in some quantum fashion. I can’t state it one way or the other. I suspect that if it does it is so subtle that it is only accessible to us in periods of self honesty. But if in fact the information in our heads creates synchronicity when we are subject to similar stimuli then that would produce an equal effect. So either way it is irrelevant. It just works. And group prayer or ritual would construct new axioms and biases and produce similarly synchronous knowledge in all of us. Now religion – as in a ritualistic group gathering – is something else altogether because the repetition of ritual, the submission to the throng, and the gregariousness we fell to the pack, all of which are present in the church or temple, produces a profound feeling of safety similar to that felt by our animal cousins when running with the herd or pack. It is this feeling we call ‘spiritual’ or ‘submission’: it’s a mild euphoria that spiritualists seek to amplify through practice. And it is one of the most universal and desired feelings of mankind. Combining this experience of mild euphoria with knowledge of gods, heroes and saints produces a form of honesty within the self that we cannot produce by other means. It is this clarity or honesty that gives religions their power. We can, if we pray, or contemplate, use the mythological structure of information, along without our existing knowledge, to find solutions – too seek and obtain answers as ‘insights’. And at worst we can find comfort in the throng. (Which we now overload with consumption until we realize it is meaningless, and that we have been deceived – if not drugged – by commercial information.) As yet we do not know how to produce the same effect as religion and prayer by any other means. I suspect I know how to do it. The question is whether it is possible to provide sufficient incentive to train enough people to do it to cause a reformation of the methods by which we teach every generation the Christian Discipline of Love into something more modern. I struggle with this problem and it’s probably the hardest problem I’ve tried to solve. And that’s saying something…..
-
Actually, I’m Not An Atheist
(important piece) (on the existence of gods)
—“You’re one of my favorite Catholic Atheists”—
[W]ell, thank you. Although, while a scientist, I am not an atheist. I am just what is called a Naturalist, and not a Supernaturalist. I understand that Gods exist. They exist as numbers exist. If I was an atheist you wouldn’t catch me praying (talking to god) regularly. Which I do. Often. I just have a very esoteric concept of the nature of a god’s existence. And I separate the existence of gods from primitive notions of religion. I am not sure what the difference is between a supernaturally existential deity, and a worldwide knowledge of socrates, or a regional knowledge of a saint, or a local knowledge of ancestors, and praying to the knowledge of that personality, and those memories, for love, support, advice, and counsel. For various reasons I am fairly certain prayer ‘works’. I am fairly certain gods ‘work’. I am fairly certain that gods, ritual, and prayer are a competitive advantage. And whether one chooses to explain away all of this scientifically as psychology, or accept it metaphysically, or embody it supernaturally, is merely a function of one’s abilities, biases, and preferences. As far as I know gods exist as numbers exist, and gods ‘work’ for the same reason numbers work. There are consequences to the existence and use of numbers that transcend human abilities to perceive and conceptualize. If you construct various axioms, the resulting patterns can be rich sources of information – especially when combined with new experiences. If you construct stories of gods, heroes and saints there is no difference. So as far as I know, the study of gods, heroes and saints literally reconstructs them in your mind, and you can ask them questions if you learn how. It is even more useful to do the same with one’s ancestors since you carry not only those ideas but their genes, and the biases and benefits that they passed down to you. Our ancestors thought in physicality or spirituality because they did not have the concept of INFORMATION that is the model we use today to understand the physical world. And it is INFORMATION that economists, philosophers and behaviorists such as myself use as the model for describing the human world, and not spirituality or physicality. I have no idea if information in my head, yours, and others, interacts in some quantum fashion. I can’t state it one way or the other. I suspect that if it does it is so subtle that it is only accessible to us in periods of self honesty. But if in fact the information in our heads creates synchronicity when we are subject to similar stimuli then that would produce an equal effect. So either way it is irrelevant. It just works. And group prayer or ritual would construct new axioms and biases and produce similarly synchronous knowledge in all of us. Now religion – as in a ritualistic group gathering – is something else altogether because the repetition of ritual, the submission to the throng, and the gregariousness we fell to the pack, all of which are present in the church or temple, produces a profound feeling of safety similar to that felt by our animal cousins when running with the herd or pack. It is this feeling we call ‘spiritual’ or ‘submission’: it’s a mild euphoria that spiritualists seek to amplify through practice. And it is one of the most universal and desired feelings of mankind. Combining this experience of mild euphoria with knowledge of gods, heroes and saints produces a form of honesty within the self that we cannot produce by other means. It is this clarity or honesty that gives religions their power. We can, if we pray, or contemplate, use the mythological structure of information, along without our existing knowledge, to find solutions – too seek and obtain answers as ‘insights’. And at worst we can find comfort in the throng. (Which we now overload with consumption until we realize it is meaningless, and that we have been deceived – if not drugged – by commercial information.) As yet we do not know how to produce the same effect as religion and prayer by any other means. I suspect I know how to do it. The question is whether it is possible to provide sufficient incentive to train enough people to do it to cause a reformation of the methods by which we teach every generation the Christian Discipline of Love into something more modern. I struggle with this problem and it’s probably the hardest problem I’ve tried to solve. And that’s saying something…..
-
Paternalism and Classism, But Not Racism
[I]f you adopt paternalism: that your kin are an extended family, and that you will work with other extended families to cooperate non-parasitically with all other extended families, and that we produce nations not states, then you get this wonderful ability for us to religion, culture, race, class and caste. We struggle with a certain problem: that while small nations are better for the development of community and mutual insurance, large states are materially valuable for the conduct of war and less so for trade bargaining. But once we have nuclear weapons it is very hard to violate borders without committing suicide. So there appears to be no reason for large states other than aggressive warfare. And yes, some territory is objectively better than other territory. And some genes are objectively better than other genes. And we start from different levels of development. But states are as much a barrier to development as they are to improvement precisely because of scale. Scale increases the ability to engage in corruption. With scale we find anonymity. With anonymity we have informational asymmetry. With informational asymmetry we have opportunity for corruption (privatization of commons). So you know, I’m a CLASSIST, in that i recognize the problem of carrying a large and counterproductive underclass, but I am not a RACIST in that I want all groups to transcend the animal, become fully human, and evolve into what we imagine as gods. And its possible. We had it right. Unfortunately we blew it. And now we have to fix it.