Curt Doolittle

Theme: Civilization

  • Is Male Bonding The Source Of Civilization?

    (hmmm… well, lets do a propertarian analysis of that question)—“How do you feel about mannerbunds?”—Harrison Baker

    Well you know, I tend to stay away from silly terminology and instead make operationally testable statements. men evolved to work in groups of brothers to herd women, hold territory, and kill competitors and take their stuff. this requires both cooperation: shared risk, and loyalty: elimination of defectors and parasites, and a division of spoils preserving both cooperation, loyalty, and the punishment of defectors and cheats. civilization is the result of teh accumulated knowledge and institutions that allow us to scale this system to ever larger and ever more competitive circumstances. in this sense, yes, the bond between men that we traditionally call the ‘intitiatic brotherhood of soldiers’ is in fact, the source of what we call ‘civilization’: cooperation at very large scales. But we could just as likely say that it’s the need for men to bind to herd women and hold territory and develop institutions that is the source of civilization. or we could say that it is man’s reaction to the untrustworthiness of women that is the origin of civilization since all we do is invent better farms in which to herd our women at lower cost to us. Or we could say that women are untrustworthy in order to force us to build good farms (nests) for them in which they can nest. And that it is women’s untrustworthiness that forces us to cooperate and create nesting areas for them. Roll that little model around in your head for a while? 😉 Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Is Male Bonding The Source Of Civilization?

    (hmmm… well, lets do a propertarian analysis of that question)—“How do you feel about mannerbunds?”—Harrison Baker

    Well you know, I tend to stay away from silly terminology and instead make operationally testable statements. men evolved to work in groups of brothers to herd women, hold territory, and kill competitors and take their stuff. this requires both cooperation: shared risk, and loyalty: elimination of defectors and parasites, and a division of spoils preserving both cooperation, loyalty, and the punishment of defectors and cheats. civilization is the result of teh accumulated knowledge and institutions that allow us to scale this system to ever larger and ever more competitive circumstances. in this sense, yes, the bond between men that we traditionally call the ‘intitiatic brotherhood of soldiers’ is in fact, the source of what we call ‘civilization’: cooperation at very large scales. But we could just as likely say that it’s the need for men to bind to herd women and hold territory and develop institutions that is the source of civilization. or we could say that it is man’s reaction to the untrustworthiness of women that is the origin of civilization since all we do is invent better farms in which to herd our women at lower cost to us. Or we could say that women are untrustworthy in order to force us to build good farms (nests) for them in which they can nest. And that it is women’s untrustworthiness that forces us to cooperate and create nesting areas for them. Roll that little model around in your head for a while? 😉 Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • —“A country is more than an economy. We’re a civic society.”—Bannon

    —“A country is more than an economy. We’re a civic society.”—Bannon

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-16 14:10:00 UTC

  • “If people trusted their senses it would be obvious to everyone that almost ever

    —“If people trusted their senses it would be obvious to everyone that almost every big American city is not an aristocrats garden, but more like a labor camp.”—Brian Barr

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-16 12:19:00 UTC

  • IS MALE BONDING THE SOURCE OF CIVILIZATION? (hmmm… well, lets do a propertaria

    IS MALE BONDING THE SOURCE OF CIVILIZATION?

    (hmmm… well, lets do a propertarian analysis of that question)

    —“How do you feel about mannerbunds?”—Harrison Baker

    Well you know, I tend to stay away from silly terminology and instead make operationally testable statements.

    men evolved to work in groups of brothers to herd women, hold territory, and kill competitors and take their stuff.

    this requires both cooperation: shared risk, and loyalty: elimination of defectors and parasites, and a division of spoils preserving both cooperation, loyalty, and the punishment of defectors and cheats.

    civilization is the result of teh accumulated knowledge and institutions that allow us to scale this system to ever larger and ever more competitive circumstances.

    in this sense, yes, the bond between men that we traditionally call the ‘intitiatic brotherhood of soldiers’ is in fact the source of what we call ‘civilization;: cooperation at very large scales.

    But we could just as likely say that it’s the need for men to bind to herd women and hold territory and develop institutions that is the source of civilization.

    or we could say that it is man’s reaction to the untrustworthiness of women that is the origin of civilization since all we do is invent better farms in which to herd our women at lower cost to us.

    Or we could say that women are untrustworthy in order to force us to build good farms (nests) for them in which they can nest. And that it is women’s untrustworthiness that forces us to cooperate and create nesting areas for them.

    Roll that little model around in your head for a while? 😉

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-16 10:19:00 UTC

  • RELIGION IS EXPLICABLE BY SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS ALSO. SORRY. JUST IS. NO MAGIC NEC

    RELIGION IS EXPLICABLE BY SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS ALSO. SORRY. JUST IS. NO MAGIC NECESSARY. NO SUPERSTITION NECESSARY. NO LIES NECESSARY.

    1) myth=history/heroes,

    2) ritual=plays/stoicism

    3) festivals=sports/holidays/feasts

    That the ancients used primitive concepts in all walks of life where we no longer do is simply an artifact of the process of accumulating particular rather than analogistic knowledge.

    What makes people feel spiritual is literally the combination of:

    0) a narrative that provides common decidability on tie breakers that support our group evolutionary strategy

    1) what we think of meditation or prayer in which we are free to be honest with ourselves,

    2) the chant/fire/group prayer where we feel the pack response in safety,

    3) the play/church/school/temple where we feel the pack response in narrative,

    4) the feast/festival/sport where we feel the pack response in ‘celebration’.

    5) war/competition where we draw upon all of the above.

    Spirituality (elation,safety) is produced by the pack response.

    Spiritual euporia (in all it’s names) is produced by the intellectual equivalent of abandonment of all ‘concerns’.

    But these ‘effects’ are achievable by multiple means, both shinto/stoic/buddhist personal ritual, group prayer or storytelling ritual, team sport and festival ritual, and martial and funeral ritual.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-16 10:09:00 UTC

  • THE MODEL IS INFORMATION There is no steady state. the rules are not stateful, b

    THE MODEL IS INFORMATION

    There is no steady state. the rules are not stateful, but adaptive. There is no ‘done’. genes and culture and norms and institutions all store past information that we can express when needed. It’s not that we are machines that adapt to a fixed set. but that we store a broad range of possibilities that we can express through genetic, cultural, normative, personal, political and institutional SELECTION.

    We are still thinking in terms of mechanical models rather than informational models. man and the universe are correctly represented as information.

    This is what Hayek was trying to tell us but he was too early, and the crisis too early. It took Turing and two or three generations of programmers to understand what he and popper had intuited: information is not only the model for the physical sciences, but we are part of the physical sciences, and information is the current model we must work from.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-16 08:11:00 UTC

  • (note) Tell a story, teach a lesson. in every great era … model… information

    (note)

    Tell a story, teach a lesson.

    in every great era … model…

    information is our era’s model

    in physics, in economics

    revise our prior understandings

    the success of the west in the ancient and modern worlds.

    for a host of reasons, we can see that

    the west calculates faster and better than the rest.

    the origin story.

    the result.. sov -> markets in everything

    calculation in everything.

    faster adaptation and invention

    but what has gone wrong?

    the innovaton and reacton cycles

    this cycle was pseudoscience.

    the reason for the success of pseudocience,

    the reason for the failure to counter it.

    the solution to it

    The end of history is the truthful civilization

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-16 01:42:00 UTC

  • Yes we killed all the natives. We are hella good at killing. Are you sure you wa

    Yes we killed all the natives. We are hella good at killing. Are you sure you wanna take this to the wall?

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-15 18:47:00 UTC

  • Intellectual History In A Nutshell

    0) THE BIRTH OF THE WEST: SOVEREIGNTY. COUNTER-REVOLUTIONS 1) RELIGION: THE FIRST INFANTILIZATION OF THE INDO-EUROPEANS. (corrected with aristotelian reason, stoic and roman law)

    2) CHRISTIANITY: THE FIRST INFANTILIZATION OF THE WESTERN INDO-EUROPEANS (corrected with empiricism, and anglo common law) 3) COSMOPOLITANISM: THE SECOND INFANTILIZATION OF THE WEST. AND THE NEW WEST. (corrected with testimonialism, and propertarian natural law) WHY IS IT WE MUST DE-INFANTILIZE MAN IN EVERY GREAT ERA?