Curt Doolittle

Theme: Agency

  • WE ARE MEN, AND LEARNING FROM TRUTH TO POWER IS HEROIC —“CURT, I’M SORRY I SAI

    WE ARE MEN, AND LEARNING FROM TRUTH TO POWER IS HEROIC

    —“CURT, I’M SORRY I SAID…”—

    Guess what. You didn’t offend me. I understand what it is to be a man, and you are being a man. You are trying to speak truth to power so to speak (not that I have much power). And this is what men do, what and cowards do not do. They shame, ridicule, gossip, rally, and undermine the person rather than defeat the argument.

    My work is extremely complicated because what I produce is self organizing, and via-negativa, rather than deliberate – and self organizing systems are hard to understand. We express a series of limits, and all else is possible within them rather than proposing an ideal. This means that instead of tracing a single line of thought through it’s various conditions (like a software program), we have to learn all the systems of limits, and run cases through those limits until we understand how all those limits work together.

    Criticism is good. Systematically trying to undermine me hurts my message, because it decreases the willingness of people to pay the high investment cost of learning a self organizing system – and therefore hurts our people. So by disagreeing with me we find a man’s way of learning – not by submission and obedience, but by demonstration of commitments to truth even to the powerful. Now, I prefer critical questions rather than attacks, but I can tell the difference between intellectually honest and moral criticism, and the opposite.

    There is a very great difference between criticism because something doesn’t make sense to you, or you disagree with it, and undermining because it conflicts with a malinvestment that you have made, and are desperately trying to protect from the truth. In that case, it is me who must speak truth to your power (assuming I have the time and energy and you some degree of intellectual honesty.

    -Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-14 08:23:00 UTC

  • Look, we evolved as pack animals and those intuitions you feel but cannot intros

    Look, we evolved as pack animals and those intuitions you feel but cannot introspectively analyze are intuitions that find comfort in a leader of the pack, membership in the pack, and running with the pack.

    We have atomized property and atomized individuals yet we are always pack(male) and herd (female) animals.

    There are very few of us that have had occasion to develop the mental discipline to create agency, and therefor understand these impulses as artifacts to be felt, understood, but not acted upon, just as violence, theft, or envy are to be felt, understood, but not acted upon.

    It’s not that I don’t understand the desire for a pack(herd) leader, membership in the pack(herd) and the feeling of running with the pack (herd). I do.

    It’s that like the impulse to commit other forms of crime exists in many if not all of us to some degree or another, but most of us learn not to act on those impulses.

    If you lack agency to do so that’s understandable, but then you lack the agency to make fully rational choices, and as lacking fully rational choices you are not fully human.

    And as such unfit for decisions demanding of rationality and agency.

    And that decision is the judgement of truth or falsehood.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-13 19:11:00 UTC

  • The number of people alive at anyone time that can transcend the animal is very

    The number of people alive at anyone time that can transcend the animal is very small. The number who cannot but will follow those who can if it is in their interests is large. The number who will follow those *assuming they will apply the violence to restore the production of agency via truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, and markets in everything, is far and above enough.

    We convince those that are capable of agency, we provide strategy for those who follow those with it, and provide material incentive to those neither able nor understanding, but whose interests we serve.

    And we bend the rest to our will or we end the need to.

    Mankind does not need many judges, it needs a plan, generals, and soldiers. The masses just follow the order the strong institute, and it is very hard to argue with the imposition of natural law by the ongoing suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation, by deceit, fraud, theft, and violence.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-13 19:00:00 UTC

  • —“You Are Wrong About Gods”–

    I’m not wrong about gods at all. The only question is whether it’s possible for not-quite-humans to function without an imaginary pack leader acting as a unit of measurement. I mean, women demonstrate NAXALT, and men demonstrate INTENTIONALITY, and by both demonstrations we can identify the not-yet-human, not yet possessing agency, and therefore not yet capable of sovereignty. Now, I know why the weak mind needs such lies. But the question is, can we train the weak mind to possess sufficient agency that it does not need these lies. It should be possible for many.

  • —“You Are Wrong About Gods”–

    I’m not wrong about gods at all. The only question is whether it’s possible for not-quite-humans to function without an imaginary pack leader acting as a unit of measurement. I mean, women demonstrate NAXALT, and men demonstrate INTENTIONALITY, and by both demonstrations we can identify the not-yet-human, not yet possessing agency, and therefore not yet capable of sovereignty. Now, I know why the weak mind needs such lies. But the question is, can we train the weak mind to possess sufficient agency that it does not need these lies. It should be possible for many.

  • Mankind Does Not Need Many Judges, It Needs a Plan, Generals, and Soldiers.

    The number of people alive at anyone time that can transcend the animal is very small. The number who cannot but will follow those who can if it is in their interests is large. The number who will follow those *assuming they will apply the violence to restore the production of agency via truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, and markets in everything, is far and above enough. We convince those that are capable of agency, we provide strategy for those who follow those with it, and provide material incentive to those neither able nor understanding, but whose interests we serve. And we bend the rest to our will or we end the need to. Mankind does not need many judges, it needs a plan, generals, and soldiers. The masses just follow the order the strong institute, and it is very hard to argue with the imposition of natural law by the ongoing suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation, by deceit, fraud, theft, and violence. May 13, 2018 7:00pm

  • Mankind Does Not Need Many Judges, It Needs a Plan, Generals, and Soldiers.

    The number of people alive at anyone time that can transcend the animal is very small. The number who cannot but will follow those who can if it is in their interests is large. The number who will follow those *assuming they will apply the violence to restore the production of agency via truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, and markets in everything, is far and above enough. We convince those that are capable of agency, we provide strategy for those who follow those with it, and provide material incentive to those neither able nor understanding, but whose interests we serve. And we bend the rest to our will or we end the need to. Mankind does not need many judges, it needs a plan, generals, and soldiers. The masses just follow the order the strong institute, and it is very hard to argue with the imposition of natural law by the ongoing suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation, by deceit, fraud, theft, and violence. May 13, 2018 7:00pm

  • There are very few of us

    Look, we evolved as pack animals and those intuitions you feel but cannot introspectively analyze are intuitions that find comfort in a leader of the pack, membership in the pack, and running with the pack. We have atomized property and atomized individuals yet we are always pack(male) and herd (female) animals. There are very few of us that have had occasion to develop the mental discipline to create agency, and therefor understand these impulses as artifacts to be felt, understood, but not acted upon, just as violence, theft, or envy are to be felt, understood, but not acted upon. It’s not that I don’t understand the desire for a pack(herd) leader, membership in the pack(herd) and the feeling of running with the pack (herd). I do. It’s that like the impulse to commit other forms of crime exists in many if not all of us to some degree or another, but most of us learn not to act on those impulses. If you lack agency to do so that’s understandable, but then you lack the agency to make fully rational choices, and as lacking fully rational choices you are not fully human. And as such unfit for decisions demanding of rationality and agency. And that decision is the judgement of truth or falsehood.

  • There are very few of us

    Look, we evolved as pack animals and those intuitions you feel but cannot introspectively analyze are intuitions that find comfort in a leader of the pack, membership in the pack, and running with the pack. We have atomized property and atomized individuals yet we are always pack(male) and herd (female) animals. There are very few of us that have had occasion to develop the mental discipline to create agency, and therefor understand these impulses as artifacts to be felt, understood, but not acted upon, just as violence, theft, or envy are to be felt, understood, but not acted upon. It’s not that I don’t understand the desire for a pack(herd) leader, membership in the pack(herd) and the feeling of running with the pack (herd). I do. It’s that like the impulse to commit other forms of crime exists in many if not all of us to some degree or another, but most of us learn not to act on those impulses. If you lack agency to do so that’s understandable, but then you lack the agency to make fully rational choices, and as lacking fully rational choices you are not fully human. And as such unfit for decisions demanding of rationality and agency. And that decision is the judgement of truth or falsehood.

  • “A thought: this want of a pack leader; Do you think it is forever changing? At

    —“A thought: this want of a pack leader; Do you think it is forever changing? At first thought it would be a projection onto another, for whatever the reasons, then once one has acquired or matured those parts within themselves to a point they no longer need that leader, they move onto the next and repeat. Do you feel a link between internal maturation of the organism and projection onto another?”— Scott Claremont

    Scott,

    I’m not exactly sure what you are trying to say but if I’m guessing correctly, then yes, it’s forever changing both at the macro (group) and personal(individual) level, and that’s the evidence anyway if we look across time.

    I usually use the example of ethics:

    > infantile(selfish) > heroic(imitative), virtue(character) > rule (law, norm > discipline-rules) > and outcome.

    And that our ‘gods’ mature just like our ethics.

    But what does that mean for education, commons production, and justice (law)?

    I mean, if we acknowledge the needs of men we supply them with what they need to transition (mature), until that point they no longer can.

    How do we stop the propagation of falsehoods while preserving the utility of parable?

    How do we fulfill the pack leader demand, while not creating falsehoods?

    So far I can’t get past the homogenous polity and the king/emperor as pack leader. The universe as ‘divine order’ without divinity. And man’s purpose to become the universe’s gods.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-13 10:23:00 UTC