Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • Truth is a Very Expensive Norm – That’s Why No One Else Does It.

    (guaranteed to make people angry)(sketch)

    [H]IERARCHY OF TRUTHFUL CULTURES

    • -TRUTHFUL-
      GERMANIC EUROPE (non-ideological)
      ANGLO/AMERICAN (ideological optimism)
      INDIA (utopian idealism and justification)
    • -DECEPTIVE-
      JEWISH (circumstantial truth, dual ethics, framing and overloading: pseudoscience and pseudorationalism and informational asymmetry)
      CHINA (creative lying, obscurantism, and delaying, lying as buying time, avoiding conflict, accumulating strength.)
    • -DECEITFUL-
      RUSSIA (outright lying and cheating, non-contractual, lying as strength,)
      ISLAM/ARAB (denial of reality, deceit and aggression, lying as heroic.)

    I need a third dimension because India and SE Asia are hard to fit in a stack. And the more I work at it the more I admire how Hindus really just don’t connect to reality so much as lie.  It’s a totally different mentality.

    Source: Curt Doolittle – TRUTH IS A VERY EXPENSIVE NORM – THATS WHY NO ONE…

  • Truth: Why is Propertarianism Different?

    [B]ecause while a number of other philosophers have come to the conclusion that all we must do is tell the truth, no other philosopher has told you how you can tell the truth: by speaking truthfully: by providing the warranty that you have performed due diligence on any speech that you place into the informational and normative commons. And by describing precisely how you can perform that due diligence.

  • Truth: Why is Propertarianism Different?

    [B]ecause while a number of other philosophers have come to the conclusion that all we must do is tell the truth, no other philosopher has told you how you can tell the truth: by speaking truthfully: by providing the warranty that you have performed due diligence on any speech that you place into the informational and normative commons. And by describing precisely how you can perform that due diligence.

  • Moral Objectivity or Relativity?

    [M]orality is as absolute as mathematics. Everything else is not morality but competitive strategy: contractual variations upon objective morality. Just as all law is as absolute as mathematics but all legislation contractual variation (or command).

    The conflation of morality with strategy, and law with command is a long-standing problem in rational philosophy. The law and morality are identical in content. Group Strategy and Group Contract are merely utilitarian. Cooperation evolved after individual survival. For cooperation to be rational it must be mutually beneficial. For it to be mutually beneficial it must be (in the aggregate) non-parasitic. We raise our children, demonstrate kin selection with kin, and we cooperate with non-kin, and we compete with those with whom we do not cooperate. So: Productive Fully informed. Warrantied. Voluntary Transfer Free of Negative Externality of the same criteria equals beneficial cooperation. Morality is an absolute. Norms are merely tactics. Legislation is not necessarily lawful. Norms are not necessarily moral. As such, we can measure whether some cultures are more moral than others, by measuring the degree of suppression of parasitism (free riding) that is suppressed by law and norm. So not only is morality absolute, but the relative moral content of different cultures is absolute. That this difference determines economic velocity, and economic velocity affords us greater morality (if we choose it) is the more interesting area of inquiry. Cheers Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Moral Objectivity or Relativity?

    [M]orality is as absolute as mathematics. Everything else is not morality but competitive strategy: contractual variations upon objective morality. Just as all law is as absolute as mathematics but all legislation contractual variation (or command).

    The conflation of morality with strategy, and law with command is a long-standing problem in rational philosophy. The law and morality are identical in content. Group Strategy and Group Contract are merely utilitarian. Cooperation evolved after individual survival. For cooperation to be rational it must be mutually beneficial. For it to be mutually beneficial it must be (in the aggregate) non-parasitic. We raise our children, demonstrate kin selection with kin, and we cooperate with non-kin, and we compete with those with whom we do not cooperate. So: Productive Fully informed. Warrantied. Voluntary Transfer Free of Negative Externality of the same criteria equals beneficial cooperation. Morality is an absolute. Norms are merely tactics. Legislation is not necessarily lawful. Norms are not necessarily moral. As such, we can measure whether some cultures are more moral than others, by measuring the degree of suppression of parasitism (free riding) that is suppressed by law and norm. So not only is morality absolute, but the relative moral content of different cultures is absolute. That this difference determines economic velocity, and economic velocity affords us greater morality (if we choose it) is the more interesting area of inquiry. Cheers Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Lending Then Repossessing Your Violence

    [I] was born with a wealth of violence. I lend that violence to the state to use on my behalf collective gain. However, should the state no longer work in my interests, or should any man break my contract for cooperation, I reserve my right to withdraw my deposit of violence and use it to both restore cooperation and to restore the state to the pursuit of my interests. It’s not complicated.

  • Lending Then Repossessing Your Violence

    [I] was born with a wealth of violence. I lend that violence to the state to use on my behalf collective gain. However, should the state no longer work in my interests, or should any man break my contract for cooperation, I reserve my right to withdraw my deposit of violence and use it to both restore cooperation and to restore the state to the pursuit of my interests. It’s not complicated.

  • Position on Marriage?  It’s a Contract.

    [M]y position is that the state has no place in private contracts, and that a marriage is a private contract.

    My concern is that the nation produce laws for individuals and policy for families and this may further reduce the policy bias toward the family as a unit of production and reproduction, and increasingly toward the consumption (hedonism) of individuals – dysgenia.

    A marriage creates a corporation in which shareholders pool assets, and it conveys limited power of attorney, to both (or more) shareholders to act on behalf of the other. If prenuptial agreements are adhered to rigidly, and there is no child support or spousal support then I am happy with it.

    So my suggestion is to take the Alabama strategy and remove the state from marriage agreements, and let people engage in whatever relations they want.

    So I am against state marriage en toto, and fully supportive of any voluntary contract that people wish to enter into. I would be comfortable with polygamy/polyamory evolving. But when I say I believe these things, it’s in the context of freedom of association and disassociation. So if you don’t want to serve polygamists, you don’t have to.

  • Position on Marriage?  It’s a Contract.

    [M]y position is that the state has no place in private contracts, and that a marriage is a private contract.

    My concern is that the nation produce laws for individuals and policy for families and this may further reduce the policy bias toward the family as a unit of production and reproduction, and increasingly toward the consumption (hedonism) of individuals – dysgenia.

    A marriage creates a corporation in which shareholders pool assets, and it conveys limited power of attorney, to both (or more) shareholders to act on behalf of the other. If prenuptial agreements are adhered to rigidly, and there is no child support or spousal support then I am happy with it.

    So my suggestion is to take the Alabama strategy and remove the state from marriage agreements, and let people engage in whatever relations they want.

    So I am against state marriage en toto, and fully supportive of any voluntary contract that people wish to enter into. I would be comfortable with polygamy/polyamory evolving. But when I say I believe these things, it’s in the context of freedom of association and disassociation. So if you don’t want to serve polygamists, you don’t have to.

  • Have We Passed Peak Human?

    PEAK HUMAN? [O]MG. What if we have passed ‘peak human’ already? What if it is not possible to improve upon late hunter-gatherer genetics, and that urbanization has produced increasingly aggressive, less intelligent, more impulsive peoples? What if inbreeding, low IQ, higher aggression, and higher reproduction are a superior evolutionary strategy? Source: Curt Doolittle