Theme: Agency

  • OPEN LETTER: CONTRA THE VIGOR OF PUBESCENCE (I am not constructing a philosophy

    OPEN LETTER: CONTRA THE VIGOR OF PUBESCENCE

    (I am not constructing a philosophy for losers. Sorry.)

    You attack me for not agreeing with the sentimental religion of disaffected pubescent males longing for the romanticism of a bygone era?

    And it would be nice to have more followers. But if that means followers are infantilized males shouting as coverage for lack of feminine attention, then that is an acceptable loss.

    History provides us with the truth of man. Philosophy constitutes his attempts at construction of value systems with which to accommodate his place in history, and these philosophies are universally constructed in eras of class rotation. And class rotation is the product of economic and military success and failure – aesthetics productions are the result not cause of these transformations.

    Works are the product of one’s age. Using the institutional technologies available. All great works whether military, artistic, technological, and intellectual arise from the middle class in times of change in celebration of the transfer of power.

    I posted Durant’s criticism of Nietzsche yesterday and it’s rock solid. My own criticism is that aesthetics, arguments and religions justify reproductive strategies, and reproductives strategies reflect one’s gender and class. If one chooses the reproductive strategy of the masturbatory male lacking sufficient virility with which to attract women, then his choice of philosophy is codification of his reproductive strategy, class, and desirability.

    That generation you venerate has passed. That era has passed. Philosophies are strategies for times of transition, given circumstances of transition. That time is past. We can no longer unite en masse under nationalist anti-modernity as did the nazi era (as aesthetically brilliant as it was.)

    There is nothing incompatible between the overman and my work other than that the means of achieving our ultimate potential are a novel religion with which we must win a majority by conversion under your fantasy, and the systematic application of science and law by a minority willing to raise the cost of the status quo by violence in mine.

    It may be true that you can resurrect a hokey 19th century religion. It may be true that traditionalists can resurrect medieval christianity. It may be true that classicists can resurrect pagan hero and nature worship. But it is more LIKELY true that we can continue to apply truthfulness in all walks of life, and create a competitor to jewish and islamic law, using natural law and truth telling, through which those more viscous philosophies gain their vigor.

    The mistake you made was vanity, pride, and religious conviction in a fallacy. You called me out in public by attacking me when I asked you not to force me into that debate – knowing the result.

    And by doing so you have both demonstrated the failure of the religion you devoutly worship as a means of obtaining self validity, and made it impossible for yourself to recant in front of your peers.

    The mature man admits failure and passion, and the more mature man responds with understanding and forgiveness.

    I am not sure you can admit failure, blame passion and youth – not because you are not intellectually capable of grasping the folly of your over-investment in a comic-book religion for sophomores (something all of us most do in order to transition from prior metaphysics to new ones), but because you would loose the esteem of your peers if you did.

    This is wisdom. And your folly and pride will deprive you of it. Because my analysis of incentives means that the value you place on having friends who sympathize with your justification of your reproductive strategy, even if you and they err, and even if that strategy fails to advance your reproduction, is more important than achieving any existential result in this world.

    On the other hand, I care only whether I give men of our age a means of achieving our ends using the tools and technologies of our time, by providing incentives to people of our time. To force the transofrmation of the most important institution in western history: property, judge, rule of law, jury, and senate. And to construct arguments in science rather than religion.

    Good luck. I did the best I could afford to do with you. Not all investments pay returns.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 03:57:00 UTC

  • LOVE So times you fall in love at first sight. I have fairly recently. Then you

    LOVE

    So times you fall in love at first sight. I have fairly recently. Then you dismiss it as reproductive impulse. Then you confirm it through experience. And then the attraction sticks with you.

    Unfortunately there are things I just don’t believe in: interfering with a marriage. Especially when the man does his duty for his family.

    Even if he is not as able or successful. If he does his selfless duty I respect him. And it offends me to interfere.

    I am just not wired like that. I can’t really understand people who are.

    Now, assuming the woman takes action to separate that is a different thing. But I have enough of marley’s chains on my conscience. I don’t need that one.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-13 16:22:00 UTC

  • PURPOSE IS PACIFICATION: BENDING THE UNIVERSE TO OUR WILL All knowledge is not w

    PURPOSE IS PACIFICATION: BENDING THE UNIVERSE TO OUR WILL

    All knowledge is not welcome. Ignorance is comforting. The least comforting of which is that the universe is not our friend. We defeat the universe’s struggle for entropy with every day we continue exist. To survive, it is our only function – to conquer and bend the universe to our will, for our own purpose, and in doing so make a garden of it, by pacifying that universe that cares nothing for us in the least, and works every day to eliminate us.

    The history of man is the history of pacification of the universe around him.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-13 06:18:00 UTC

  • FUNCTION OF PROFILES IS TO TEACH YOU ABOUT OTHERS, MORE SO THAN YOURSELF. Strang

    http://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personality-test-meaningless?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=article%3Afixed&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebookTHE FUNCTION OF PROFILES IS TO TEACH YOU ABOUT OTHERS, MORE SO THAN YOURSELF.

    Strangely enough, the article is an exercise in criticism using pseudoscience which is kind of humorous.

    The fact is this:

    (a) MBT Is not a diagnostic tool, it is an tool for categorizing methods of interpersonal communication and collaboration. It is a tool of interpersonal understanding. It assists you in communicating with others in a common language. And it is entirely POSITIVE in construction (not clinical and critical.) People with similar behavior definitely fall into these categories and we have a LOT OF DATA showing so. We can map this data to career paths and show distributions. The problem with this test is that it is not 600 questions with lie detectors. So variations in marginal scores are large. The 16 types (boxes) are ideal types. but many people sit near the lines, rather than the center of the boxes. this is fine. People come to understand it.

    (b) Yes, big 5 is better – for a totalitarian system of thought – much like freudianism it’s for diagnosing deviations from a mean – this is a tyrannical tool of socialists and feminists for applying critique to western values. The big 5 is a DIAGNOSTIC tool used by psychologists and it’s a frame of reference for them. But then, we also understand that Rorschach tests are pseudoscientific and have no empirical basis but something like 80% of psychologists have been taught to use them.

    (c) Yes, Propertarianism is probably much better than the big 5, as a division of perception, cognition, judgement, knowledge labor and advocacy.

    (d) if you take it a number of times, you will slowly determine how to categorize your behavior according to the categories.

    (e) sixteen categories is about the limit at which it is useful to group people for the average person to use in comparisons.

    (f) It is terribly useful in training people to understand the incentives of others.

    (g) the goal is to train people to think of others as having different incentives than you do. This is the problem. And that is the purpose of these ‘tests’.

    For example, before I came up with propertarianism, I used this series instead:

    (a) dominance / submission

    (b) extroversion / introversion

    (c) patience / impulsivity

    (d) blame acceptance / blame avoidance (Which I still find very useful)

    After propertarianism I just explain things as reproductive strategies in an attempt to acquire resources of which status and cooperative alliances are as important as material goods.

    WHY IT MATTERS

    All that matters is that we train people to be other-focused. It actually doesn’t matter which framework you use.

    The reason I defend MBT is because it is easy enough for non-specialists to use, and sufficiently EXPLANATORY that

    WHAT I PREFER

    1) IQ Test

    2) Haidt’s Moral Foundations Test

    3) Your parent’s social and economic class

    4) Your ethnic, religious, cultural, origins.

    5) Propertarian explanation of your incentives.

    But those things require a lot of understanding to make use of.

    Curt Doolittle


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-13 06:02:00 UTC

  • EMPIRICAL CEO ADVICE 3: People’s stress is not a reason to make a decision. Much

    EMPIRICAL CEO ADVICE 3:

    People’s stress is not a reason to make a decision. Much to the distress of my management teams I am perfectly happy postponing tactical decisions until the information is in, and sometimes until it cannot be delayed.

    This might sound counter to conventional wisdom but my particular skill is the long horizon I have no problem making strategic decisions – early. Because that is where I spend nearly all of my efforts.

    But I have good reasons for delaying a lot of other decisions.

    Why? People use early decisions as cheap means of experimentation that exchanges lower effort for offloading risk onto the business. I force them to collect information through research and to continue producing until change in production is necessary. Most middle management bloat and job justification is the result of playing at experimentation rather than self education by research. People are lazy in all walks of life. Progressives spend resources others earned send so does middle management. It’s the c level and the labor that pinches pennies.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-12 13:55:00 UTC

  • EMPIRICAL CEO ADVICE 2: Never regret doing your best if you exhausted all possib

    EMPIRICAL CEO ADVICE 2:

    Never regret doing your best if you exhausted all possible sources of information. Most of the time, the worst that happens is you learn something. But if you do not exhaust all sources of information, and you ask people to trust your judgement then the worst does happen: people lose trust in you. The best way to preserve your trust is to involve others in the decision process and to exhaust all possible sources of information. If you fail, the group will preserve their trust in you – if only because they shared in trying to solve the problem. Most of the time if you try to take a discount on risk and effort it is by not exhausting all sources of information. There are no discounts on diligence.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-12 13:41:00 UTC

  • EMPIRICAL CEO ADVICE 1: Don’t do anything yourself that provides a learning oppo

    EMPIRICAL CEO ADVICE 1:

    Don’t do anything yourself that provides a learning opportunity for the people who work for you unless it presents intolerable or unsurvivable risk. It is a wasted opportunity cost for you and deprives them and the business of the the increase in knowledge capital. If it does present intolerable and unsurvivable risk, then you failed already and you must take the responsibility for either the success or the fall. )


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-12 11:26:00 UTC

  • Always greet children with a smile of approval. Always make time for joys, serio

    Always greet children with a smile of approval. Always make time for joys, serious questions and consolation. I cannot entertain children. But protection, consolation, counsel and applause are sufficient provision for men.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-11 12:58:00 UTC

  • MEME NITS r/K selection is right but fails to capture the conflict between male

    MEME NITS

    r/K selection is right but fails to capture the conflict between male and female reproductive strategies.

    Or how r reproduction and k aggression can be used against high k.

    So while some of my peers like to rely on this model, it carries a hint of scientific legitimacy at the expense of causality necessary to create the connection between democracy, the voting pattern of women, feminism, socialism, gossip, rallying and shaming, and pseudoscience so attractive to women. ( horoscopes and crystals and chakra and spirituality ).

    Women caused the death of the west. We let loose pandoras box.

    We spent thousands of years developing property and law to suppress parasitism and dysgenic.

    And democracy let women’s instincts out of the box of civilization we had used to contain them.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-09 11:15:00 UTC

  • THE MEANING OF COMPLIMENTS I can think something is sentimentally, allegorically

    THE MEANING OF COMPLIMENTS

    I can think something is sentimentally, allegorically, morally, or rationally moral, beautiful or heroic. Meaning that I agree with your sentiments.

    I can admire your attempt at creating an argument – even if you fail.

    But that is different from whether your justification is amoral, or whether you facts are questionable, or whether your judgements are biased, or whether you are engaging in wishful thinking, or whether you engage in verbalism, cunning or deceit, or whether you logic is faulty whether or your argument is necessary, or whether whether it is existentially possible, logically sound, parsimonious my stated and so forth.

    Meaning I can agree with you sentiments. I can encourage your learning. I can support your attempts.

    But I cannot claim that you have constructed a truth candidate.

    And most often what people want is confirmation that their sentiments are classifiable as a truth.

    The truth is rarely emotionally rewarding.

    It just is.

    So that is why I am supportive of good people in their journey.

    But it is also why I will often agree with your sentiments, values and objectives while at the same time faulting your arguments.

    If anything, philosophy is reducible to the science of construction truthful statements in pursuit of truth, whether we like that truth ir not.

    Conveniently, the secret of the west’s competitive advantage is our discovery and frequent use of the truth.

    So when we share a moral bias against the liars and deceives who have destroyed our civilization, we are pursuing the reconstruction of a truthful civil society and the commons we can create from it.

    So we agree on our feelings:,we desire truth.

    But stating that feeling truthfully is almost impossible. And I might argue that before my work it was not possible.

    But now it is. And it is quite simple: we never know the truth but we can clean our language of error bias wishful thinking and deceit with some effort.

    And we can require it of others I public speech.

    And we can punish offenders.

    And we can clean ourselves and others of falsehoods.

    Leaving only truth behind.

    This is the greatest transformation of man since Darwin if not since the enlightenment.

    Welcome to the revolution.

    A sentiment we can all share.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-08 13:35:00 UTC