(worth repeating) (extension of hierarchy of truth) (interesting for language geeks)***The purpose of science is not to convey the experience but to provide decidability in matters of dispute over existence regardless of experience.*** [L]ets note the difference between the following points of view. 1 existence, 2 experience of the universe, 3 utility in determining one’s action, 4 observation of an action and consequences 5 justification of the results of one’s action, 6 warranty in recommendation of action*, 7 and decidability in conflict*, …describes a spectrum of problems we must understand. Our grammar does not readily address these differences, and our problem of the verb to-be exacerbates the problem since ‘is’ evolved specifically to avoid the problem of articulating this spectrum, thereby allowing the audience to infer it. I work on the last two*. I think humans are pretty good at experience and utility. And some of us are pretty good at justificatoin. Largely, since justification is the language of morality, most people tend to use moral language. Imagine a language that required you address these seven degrees of truth in one’s grammar. Imagine the kind of self awareness one would need to avoid conflation of each of them. We have enough problem with people saying “it’s true for me” when they mean that it is sufficiently useful for me to act”.
Source: Original Site Post
-
Female Reproductive Strategy
[T]he female r-selection strategy also includes: increasing your numbers decreases your risk of (a) bearing the dominance of and abuse of an alpha, (b) bearing unwanted offspring by undesirable mates (c) engaging in status competition with other females and losing (d) running out of allies and assistance in production and care-taking (e) running out of allies in rallying and shaming the alphas (f) defecting to another group if unhappy is less provocative if you’re defecting from larger to smaller numbers (g) hiding in the herd reduces your chance of being eaten – safety in numbers.
-
Female Reproductive Strategy
[T]he female r-selection strategy also includes: increasing your numbers decreases your risk of (a) bearing the dominance of and abuse of an alpha, (b) bearing unwanted offspring by undesirable mates (c) engaging in status competition with other females and losing (d) running out of allies and assistance in production and care-taking (e) running out of allies in rallying and shaming the alphas (f) defecting to another group if unhappy is less provocative if you’re defecting from larger to smaller numbers (g) hiding in the herd reduces your chance of being eaten – safety in numbers.
-
The Shift In Violence
1) Violence is not less. It shifts from violent to indirect, and transfers from destructive to constructive use. War. Religion. Law. Credit. 2) Violence. Theft shifts from territory and women, to things, to money, to taxation, to credit, to fraud, to free riding, to conspiracy. 3) Much of the world is less violent because of prosperity. The rest is because most thefts like most property is of non-physical things. 4) If I respect life, property, norm, and tradition with expectation of purchasing a future, yet policy steals it from me – why respect it? 5) Much of postmodern theft depends on the perpetuation of habits without the incentive to produce them. We have run out of both. 6)If we no longer have the incentive to respect life, property, norm, and tradition, then why not instead construct an order in which we do? 7) Rule of Law. Strict Construction. Textualism. Property-en-toto. Informational commons. Universal standing. Class Houses. Market Gov’t.
-
The Shift In Violence
1) Violence is not less. It shifts from violent to indirect, and transfers from destructive to constructive use. War. Religion. Law. Credit. 2) Violence. Theft shifts from territory and women, to things, to money, to taxation, to credit, to fraud, to free riding, to conspiracy. 3) Much of the world is less violent because of prosperity. The rest is because most thefts like most property is of non-physical things. 4) If I respect life, property, norm, and tradition with expectation of purchasing a future, yet policy steals it from me – why respect it? 5) Much of postmodern theft depends on the perpetuation of habits without the incentive to produce them. We have run out of both. 6)If we no longer have the incentive to respect life, property, norm, and tradition, then why not instead construct an order in which we do? 7) Rule of Law. Strict Construction. Textualism. Property-en-toto. Informational commons. Universal standing. Class Houses. Market Gov’t.
-
The Zombie Apocalypse Is Here!
The zombie apocalypse is here. They just have 80 IQ’s instead of 40. The virus is conceptual. And you don’t have to shoot them in the head. Anywhere will do.
-
The Zombie Apocalypse Is Here!
The zombie apocalypse is here. They just have 80 IQ’s instead of 40. The virus is conceptual. And you don’t have to shoot them in the head. Anywhere will do.
-
The Secrets of Propertarian (Scientific) Analysis:
[T]he Secrets of Propertarian (Scientific) Analysis: 1) For any concept you refer to, construct lines of three or more points demonstrating limits not states. This is the most subtle and difficult part of the method since we tend to think in ideal types that invoke a particular experience and not the range of conditions and set of experiences that are invoked. Think in lines not states. Turn any idea into a spectrum. It’s not hard with practice. 2) Analyze information movement – who possesses it, what it consists of, and when. (programming is great for teaching you how your assumptions of the knowledge of others is tragically flawed). 3) Analyze incentives given the information individuals have at their disposal at any moment. 4) Expect people to seek to acquire at all points in time, and to seize rents whenever possible, and wherever possible means whenever they won’t be caught. 5) Expect Culture, Class, Gender, Race, Tribe, Family, and personal reproductive strategies to provide the dominant influence in decidability: whenever discretion is required these factors will influence the decision because the individual has no other means of decidability without propertarian ethics. 6) When you write, do so operationally not analogically, experientially, or observationally: use the vectors, information, incentives, biases, and decisions of individuals. Never use the word ‘is’ since it means you do not understand what you are saying. 7) Test for identity (non-conflationary identification of properties, methods and relations). Test for internal consistency of your argument. Test for external correspondence of your argument. Test for existential possiblity of each step in your argument (which is what propertarianism asks you to do by its nature). Test for Morality (that no involuntary transfers have occurrred, or if they have articulate them). Test for parsimony: that you have defined limits to all your assumptions and terms. Test for explanatory power. Attempt to falsify it: seek contradictory examples and ensure that your analysis (description) holds up. Propertarian analysis should produce tests of existential possibility: a proof. A proof is not a truth. But it is the most likely means of constructing a truth candidate that we currently know of. Curt Doolittle
-
The Secrets of Propertarian (Scientific) Analysis:
[T]he Secrets of Propertarian (Scientific) Analysis: 1) For any concept you refer to, construct lines of three or more points demonstrating limits not states. This is the most subtle and difficult part of the method since we tend to think in ideal types that invoke a particular experience and not the range of conditions and set of experiences that are invoked. Think in lines not states. Turn any idea into a spectrum. It’s not hard with practice. 2) Analyze information movement – who possesses it, what it consists of, and when. (programming is great for teaching you how your assumptions of the knowledge of others is tragically flawed). 3) Analyze incentives given the information individuals have at their disposal at any moment. 4) Expect people to seek to acquire at all points in time, and to seize rents whenever possible, and wherever possible means whenever they won’t be caught. 5) Expect Culture, Class, Gender, Race, Tribe, Family, and personal reproductive strategies to provide the dominant influence in decidability: whenever discretion is required these factors will influence the decision because the individual has no other means of decidability without propertarian ethics. 6) When you write, do so operationally not analogically, experientially, or observationally: use the vectors, information, incentives, biases, and decisions of individuals. Never use the word ‘is’ since it means you do not understand what you are saying. 7) Test for identity (non-conflationary identification of properties, methods and relations). Test for internal consistency of your argument. Test for external correspondence of your argument. Test for existential possiblity of each step in your argument (which is what propertarianism asks you to do by its nature). Test for Morality (that no involuntary transfers have occurrred, or if they have articulate them). Test for parsimony: that you have defined limits to all your assumptions and terms. Test for explanatory power. Attempt to falsify it: seek contradictory examples and ensure that your analysis (description) holds up. Propertarian analysis should produce tests of existential possibility: a proof. A proof is not a truth. But it is the most likely means of constructing a truth candidate that we currently know of. Curt Doolittle
