Curt Doolittle

Source: Original Site Post

  • Relax. I Can Stop Criticizing Critical Rationalism Now

    [I]t is merely a convenient language for science. A pidgin -just as mathematical Platonism is a convenient pidgin for mathematics.

    I apologise to my friends an ex friends for the experiments that I had to run in order to solve the superior problem.

    I appreciate all your efforts and patience.

    But I think it was worth it.

    Although science as a discipline will undoubtably disapprove of its loss of philosophical status, and possibly of the imposition of limited constraints upon what constitutes moral and legal pronouncements.

    But that is a necessary consequence of suppressing deception – and an even more important objective than suppressing mysticism.

    Cheers.

    Curt Doolittle 
    The Propertarian Institute 
    Kiev Ukraine.

  • Ending Demand For Racism

    (positioning)(achieving equality)

    [T]he only reason your race is behind my race or any other race is the difference between rates of reproduction of the classes. Just as my race is behind or a head of other races because of our suppression or lack of suppression of birth rates at the bottom. That’s it.

    So fix it. Because until you do, racism will persist – and should. Because any other behavior is illogical. It is not the color of your skin or the shape of your nose, but the percentage of your population in the bottom half of mankind.

    Human life isn’t universally sacred. It’s just that anyone who demonstrates disregard for human life is a potential risk and threat to the rest of us. But just because disregard for life is dangerous doesn’t mean you’re worthy of redistribution – or even the consumption of oxygen. You’re merely a moral hazard for the rest of us.

    If you or your offspring can’t find a way to participate in production without externalizing your costs, then you aren’t a precious snowflake. You’re a moral hazard, and a drain on both humanity and the planet. And the source of the demand for a political class that exploits productive people to fund the dysgenic and unproductive.

    You cannot deny this argument without in turn demonstrating your racial bias.

    So control reproduction. A woman has no intrinsic right to bear a child, and a man no intrinsic right to spawn one.

    That is the only way we get to equality. Equality in fact, not in lie.

    And I agree: equality is a moral ambition.

    Curt Doolittle 
    The Propertarian Institute 
    Kiev Ukraine

  • Ending Demand For Racism

    (positioning)(achieving equality)

    [T]he only reason your race is behind my race or any other race is the difference between rates of reproduction of the classes. Just as my race is behind or a head of other races because of our suppression or lack of suppression of birth rates at the bottom. That’s it.

    So fix it. Because until you do, racism will persist – and should. Because any other behavior is illogical. It is not the color of your skin or the shape of your nose, but the percentage of your population in the bottom half of mankind.

    Human life isn’t universally sacred. It’s just that anyone who demonstrates disregard for human life is a potential risk and threat to the rest of us. But just because disregard for life is dangerous doesn’t mean you’re worthy of redistribution – or even the consumption of oxygen. You’re merely a moral hazard for the rest of us.

    If you or your offspring can’t find a way to participate in production without externalizing your costs, then you aren’t a precious snowflake. You’re a moral hazard, and a drain on both humanity and the planet. And the source of the demand for a political class that exploits productive people to fund the dysgenic and unproductive.

    You cannot deny this argument without in turn demonstrating your racial bias.

    So control reproduction. A woman has no intrinsic right to bear a child, and a man no intrinsic right to spawn one.

    That is the only way we get to equality. Equality in fact, not in lie.

    And I agree: equality is a moral ambition.

    Curt Doolittle 
    The Propertarian Institute 
    Kiev Ukraine

  • Propertarianism and the Purpose of Philosophy

    (very important)

    [T]he value of philosophy is to convert what we learn, into the web (network) of related concepts that we currently USE. (Note that I do not use the word ‘believe’, which is a synonym for justification.) This often requires a great deal of rearranging of our concepts. That which was before subordinate, turns out to be superordinate. That which before was moral, turns out to be immoral. Trusted truths become harmful fallacies.

    Look at the scope of what I am trying to do:

    1) Western philosophy is the history of attempting to speak the truth, truthfully.
    2) Science and mathematics discovered the means of speaking truthfully.
    3) The scientific and mathematical methods however, did not include costs.
    4) By integrating costs into the scientific method, that method evolves into the universal means by which humans can endeavor to speak truthfully – regardless of discipline.
    5) Thus fulfilling the 2500 year old attempt to speak truthfully – even if we are forever bidden from knowing whether or now we are speaking the ultimate, most parsimonious truth that is possible.
    6) With this knowledge we can then embody in law, the principle of truth telling. And under universal standing, and rule of law, and property-en-toto, require truthful speech whenever costs are involved in one’s utterances: ethics and politics.

    If you can find more noble an ambition then I would like to know it.
    If you can find a better argument then I would like to know it.
    But I am fairly sure that I stand on the shoulders of many who came before me and the destination of their vision is pretty obvious from this height.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Philosophy of Aristocracy
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

  • Propertarianism and the Purpose of Philosophy

    (very important)

    [T]he value of philosophy is to convert what we learn, into the web (network) of related concepts that we currently USE. (Note that I do not use the word ‘believe’, which is a synonym for justification.) This often requires a great deal of rearranging of our concepts. That which was before subordinate, turns out to be superordinate. That which before was moral, turns out to be immoral. Trusted truths become harmful fallacies.

    Look at the scope of what I am trying to do:

    1) Western philosophy is the history of attempting to speak the truth, truthfully.
    2) Science and mathematics discovered the means of speaking truthfully.
    3) The scientific and mathematical methods however, did not include costs.
    4) By integrating costs into the scientific method, that method evolves into the universal means by which humans can endeavor to speak truthfully – regardless of discipline.
    5) Thus fulfilling the 2500 year old attempt to speak truthfully – even if we are forever bidden from knowing whether or now we are speaking the ultimate, most parsimonious truth that is possible.
    6) With this knowledge we can then embody in law, the principle of truth telling. And under universal standing, and rule of law, and property-en-toto, require truthful speech whenever costs are involved in one’s utterances: ethics and politics.

    If you can find more noble an ambition then I would like to know it.
    If you can find a better argument then I would like to know it.
    But I am fairly sure that I stand on the shoulders of many who came before me and the destination of their vision is pretty obvious from this height.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Philosophy of Aristocracy
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

  • On Convincing Others

    [C]HALLENGING THOUGHT OF THE DAY
    (useful)

    0 – We are unequally desirable mates – this is necessary for evolutionary adaptation.
    1 – We evolved a reproductive division of labor – the genders.
    2 – We evolved an inter-temporal division of reproductive labor:
    4 – We demonstrate short, medium, and long term preferences; 
    5 – We demonstrate short, medium, and long term moral biases;
    6 – We evolved, quite naturally, lower(<95), middle(<125) and upper(>125) classes;
    7 – We need virtue(imitative), rule (rational), and outcome (scientific) ethics;
    8 – We need sacred(religious), moral(normative), and calculative (legal) rules;
    9 – We rely upon intuitive(experiential), conscious(rational), and instrumental(calculative) tools to made decisions.
    10 – Our moral biases reflect our reproductive strategies.
    11 – Our normative biases reflect our reproductive strategies.
    12 – Our formal and informal institutions reflect our group-competitive strategies.
    13 – All universalist strategy is to extend group-competitive strategies to dominate other group competitive strategies.

    Short term strategy is in the interest of the lower classes (socialism – labor)
    Medium term strategy is in the interest of the middle classes (classical liberty – trade)
    Long term strategy is in the interests of the upper classes (aristocracy – order)

    Some people are only CAPABLE of sentimental talk and argument.
    Some people are only CAPABLE of rational talk and argument.
    Some people are CAPABLE of scientific talk and argument.

    So what does all of this tell us about persuading others? It tells us that we cannot (and should not) try. It tells us to create institutions that allow cooperation across moral codes and reproductive strategies. It tells us that the majority cannot understand these matters except experientially – once implemented.

    Curt Doolittle 
    The Propertarian Institute 
    Kiev, Ukraine.

  • On Convincing Others

    [C]HALLENGING THOUGHT OF THE DAY
    (useful)

    0 – We are unequally desirable mates – this is necessary for evolutionary adaptation.
    1 – We evolved a reproductive division of labor – the genders.
    2 – We evolved an inter-temporal division of reproductive labor:
    4 – We demonstrate short, medium, and long term preferences; 
    5 – We demonstrate short, medium, and long term moral biases;
    6 – We evolved, quite naturally, lower(<95), middle(<125) and upper(>125) classes;
    7 – We need virtue(imitative), rule (rational), and outcome (scientific) ethics;
    8 – We need sacred(religious), moral(normative), and calculative (legal) rules;
    9 – We rely upon intuitive(experiential), conscious(rational), and instrumental(calculative) tools to made decisions.
    10 – Our moral biases reflect our reproductive strategies.
    11 – Our normative biases reflect our reproductive strategies.
    12 – Our formal and informal institutions reflect our group-competitive strategies.
    13 – All universalist strategy is to extend group-competitive strategies to dominate other group competitive strategies.

    Short term strategy is in the interest of the lower classes (socialism – labor)
    Medium term strategy is in the interest of the middle classes (classical liberty – trade)
    Long term strategy is in the interests of the upper classes (aristocracy – order)

    Some people are only CAPABLE of sentimental talk and argument.
    Some people are only CAPABLE of rational talk and argument.
    Some people are CAPABLE of scientific talk and argument.

    So what does all of this tell us about persuading others? It tells us that we cannot (and should not) try. It tells us to create institutions that allow cooperation across moral codes and reproductive strategies. It tells us that the majority cannot understand these matters except experientially – once implemented.

    Curt Doolittle 
    The Propertarian Institute 
    Kiev, Ukraine.

  • A Challenge – Only Hoppe Can Debate Me

    —“First they ignore you , then they ridicule you, then they fight you then you win.”—

    [O]nly a dishonest man would recommend people not read something, rather than attack the central argument of the author. But then, dishonesty is central to the ghetto ethic, is it not?

    If you do not understand the central arguments, that is one thing, but ignorance or incompetence is not a criticism of me, it is a statement about your judgement of the mirror.

    So READ this list. Read Hoppe’s Aristocracy, Monarchy, Democracy. Read Mencius – both of these works are criticisms not solutions. These answers are: Organized violence, property-en-toto, property rights by reciprocal insurance, the symmetry of morality and property rights, and the rule of organic evolutionary law, operationally stated and calculatively constrained, praxeology resurrected as operationalism, and science as the struggle to evolve the means of speaking the truth. Watch my videos. And follow me in Propertarianism, as I drag liberty back into aristocracy and out of the medieval ghetto – kicking and screaming against the objection of a generation of failed libertines using the techniques of the marxists, to create a cult of ideology, rather than an operational institutional framework for the restoration of liberty by demonstrable actions.

    THE SHORT LIST: THE CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE
    Ricardo Duchesne: The Uniqueness of Western Civilization
    JP Mallory: In Search of Indo Europeans
    John Keegan: A History Of Warfare
    Joseph Campbell : The Hero’s Journey
    Karen Armstrong : The Great Transformation
    William Tucker: Marriage and Civilization
    Emmanuel Todd: The Explanation of Ideology
    Emmanuel Todd: The Invention of Europe
    Daniel Hannan: Inventing Freedom
    Alan MacFarlane : Origins of English Individualism
    Gregory Clark: A Farewell to Alms
    Matt Ridley: The Red Queen
    Dale Petersen: Demonic Males
    Steven Pinker: The Better Angels of Our Nature
    Daniel Kahneman: Thinking, Fast and Slow
    Francis Fukuyama: Trust Sam Harris : Lying
    Steven Pinker : The Blank Slate
    Jonathan Haidt: The Righteous Mind
    Stephen Hicks : Explaining Postmodernism
    Hans Hoppe: Democracy The God That Failed
    Doolittle: Propertarianism. High Trust Ethics Necessary for Anarchy

    A THEORY
    The only person who can compete with the argument that I make is hoppe – just as he did with his new essay – by adopting my positions: the source of liberty is violence, and the only source of liberty the law, and that argumentation is a legal constraint not a functional one. And that only by operationalism – constructing decisions by incentives and available information – is human action rationally and scientifically explicable. 

    Cheers 

    Curt Doolittle 
    The Philosophy of Aristocracy 
    The Propertarian Institute 
    Kiev, Ukraine.

  • A Challenge – Only Hoppe Can Debate Me

    —“First they ignore you , then they ridicule you, then they fight you then you win.”—

    [O]nly a dishonest man would recommend people not read something, rather than attack the central argument of the author. But then, dishonesty is central to the ghetto ethic, is it not?

    If you do not understand the central arguments, that is one thing, but ignorance or incompetence is not a criticism of me, it is a statement about your judgement of the mirror.

    So READ this list. Read Hoppe’s Aristocracy, Monarchy, Democracy. Read Mencius – both of these works are criticisms not solutions. These answers are: Organized violence, property-en-toto, property rights by reciprocal insurance, the symmetry of morality and property rights, and the rule of organic evolutionary law, operationally stated and calculatively constrained, praxeology resurrected as operationalism, and science as the struggle to evolve the means of speaking the truth. Watch my videos. And follow me in Propertarianism, as I drag liberty back into aristocracy and out of the medieval ghetto – kicking and screaming against the objection of a generation of failed libertines using the techniques of the marxists, to create a cult of ideology, rather than an operational institutional framework for the restoration of liberty by demonstrable actions.

    THE SHORT LIST: THE CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE
    Ricardo Duchesne: The Uniqueness of Western Civilization
    JP Mallory: In Search of Indo Europeans
    John Keegan: A History Of Warfare
    Joseph Campbell : The Hero’s Journey
    Karen Armstrong : The Great Transformation
    William Tucker: Marriage and Civilization
    Emmanuel Todd: The Explanation of Ideology
    Emmanuel Todd: The Invention of Europe
    Daniel Hannan: Inventing Freedom
    Alan MacFarlane : Origins of English Individualism
    Gregory Clark: A Farewell to Alms
    Matt Ridley: The Red Queen
    Dale Petersen: Demonic Males
    Steven Pinker: The Better Angels of Our Nature
    Daniel Kahneman: Thinking, Fast and Slow
    Francis Fukuyama: Trust Sam Harris : Lying
    Steven Pinker : The Blank Slate
    Jonathan Haidt: The Righteous Mind
    Stephen Hicks : Explaining Postmodernism
    Hans Hoppe: Democracy The God That Failed
    Doolittle: Propertarianism. High Trust Ethics Necessary for Anarchy

    A THEORY
    The only person who can compete with the argument that I make is hoppe – just as he did with his new essay – by adopting my positions: the source of liberty is violence, and the only source of liberty the law, and that argumentation is a legal constraint not a functional one. And that only by operationalism – constructing decisions by incentives and available information – is human action rationally and scientifically explicable. 

    Cheers 

    Curt Doolittle 
    The Philosophy of Aristocracy 
    The Propertarian Institute 
    Kiev, Ukraine.

  • More Mises Institute Reaction to Propertarianism 😉

    I don’t remember who in the thread above wondered aloud whether something Curt Doolittle wrote was a joke or not. This is generally a problem with reading what Curt Doolittle writes. It is one of the reasons I recommend not trying to read him. He has been captured by a mania for categorization, and the schema of categorization which he has constructed is largely unintelligible to anyone else. It might be that by reading him with close attention, one could, over time, learn to make sense of his writings. I myself have no interest in pursuing that strategy and am happily willing to do without whatever benefits might be attendant on such a strategy.  –  Jeff Riggenbach

    Or Jeff Riggenbach – is it that the categorization I rely upon is scientific rather than rationalist, externally correspondent instead of justificationary, and that it successfully discredits the impossible, objectively immoral, and now failed, rothbardian program upon which your organization’s income depends? 

    I have taken on a scale of work that few have dared or tried to by reforming hoppe’s cosmopolitan and kantian rationalism into the language of contemporary science. We have sufficient science now to do it.

    I have done this to save liberty from the lunatic fringe: rothbardian ghetto morality, rothbardian and misesisan pseudoscience, blockian immorality, rockewellian conspiracy theory, the pervasive adoption of marxist critique (which you demonstrate above), and hoppe’s misguided foray into habermasian justification.

    I am quite confident that no living philosopher can defeat the set of arguments I have put forth – even at their current level of maturity. And that is not a threat that I make without confidence that science has taught us that it is the language by which we speak truthfully, and german and cosmopolitan rationalism, a language by which we have constructed better and more effective lies of more murderous harm than any since the invention of scriptural religion.

    So, you have a choice: Abandon immoral, marxian, pseudoscientific, pseudo-rational, cult nonsense that harms our pursuit of liberty on a daily basis, by casting and demonstrating libertarians and those who desire liberty as the lunatic fringe and liberty as a minority proposition of fools, libertines and outcasts.

    Only the socially dysfunctional, socially marginalized and autistic spectrum public has adopted the rothbardian approach. And the era has peaked and your funding is collapsing. 

    And that is a good thing. You can, like all intellectual movements, reform, or you can perish. You can either abandon the cosmopolitans and germans and join the scientific world, or remain a cult language of rebellion against modernity.

    The Anglo enlightenment contained errors. The german enlightenment contained elaborate justifications by elaborate verbalisms. But the Cosmopolitan enlightenment was the most destructive force that man has faced since Abraham spun Zoroaster into monotheism as warfare.

    So welcome to the revolution. 

    Join it or be ended by it. I don’t, we don’t, beg for approval, we seek defeat.

    Liberty in our lifetime.

    Curt Doolittle 
    The Propertarian Institute 
    Kiev Ukraine.