Theme: Civilization

  • Q&A: WHAT IS THE INFLUENCE OF LANGUAGE ON CIVILIZATION. (worth repeating) [I]n a

    Q&A: WHAT IS THE INFLUENCE OF LANGUAGE ON CIVILIZATION.

    (worth repeating)

    [I]n a word, ‘profound’. But thanks to Paul Ba’s advice, I need to start with a word of caution.

    But my point of view is scientific and critical, rather than meaningful. Linguists care about the positive (or they wouldn’t study linguistics) and I care about the negatives: science and law. I don’t think we can improve on trial and error. I think we can only improve on testimony.

    When we negotiate to come to agreement we seek positive affirmations of meaning. These affirmations signal to one another that our interactions might be fruitful.

    When we seek to prevent error, bias and criminality, then we seek to constrain our utterances to those statements that are free of error, bias and criminality.

    This conversation is another example of the obverse / inverse framing that I’m using. If you want to convey meaning, you have one set of preferences, and if you want to prevent error, imagination, wishful thinking, cognitive bias, and deception from utterances you view the world through different eyes.

    We can use language to load, frame and overload. Languages themselves consist of frames, loadings and overloadings. In fact there are few words in any language that are not loaded, framed and overloaded: our most basic statements of operations (‘run’), existence (“there”) and perception (‘fast’). They constitute our most basic 300 words or so. Grammar itself frames by being more informationally complete (english and german) or less informationally complete (Chinese). Loading and framing in Language has profound impact on man’s minds. When we say the word ‘culture’ we are usually speaking about language, tradition, myth, and ritual. Traditions, myths and rituals contain heavy loading and framing and determine our most basic metaphysical value judgments. These metaphysical value judgements provide decidability where we assume pre-cognitively, by subconscious association, necessity or morality, where in actuality, we are merely providing some decidability that suited, at one time, some communication strategy, reproductive strategy, normative strategy, or other. (gender in french, romance in Italian – both of which we know the origins of: virgin worship in pre-christian times in France, and the effect of the troubadour movement in Italy.) So just as our genes get stuck at certain states because they cannot eliminate just ignore content, our languages get stuck at certain states and we just work past content we no longer find meaningful (french feminine references to nature). Some of these evolutionary records in language are helpful (martial germanic languages are truthful) and some evolutionary records are harmful (anything and everything in Chinese language is a burden). But worse, some framings are good (correspondence) and some are not (arabic respect without earning it, and fantasy of an extant complete truth).

    So language is a bit like wetware-programming. There are things in the grammar(organization) and functions (meaning of terms) and sometimes in the structure of words (alphabets or pictograms) that help or hinder us.

    German is perhaps the best language. I have to work on this a bit more. But others have said it in the past. German is loaded pretty heavily at this point with some bad things also: psychologizing of a sort. English is the language of science and it’s being progressively destroyed by progressives. Which is why I want to fix it.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-01 03:52:00 UTC

  • Islam vs Protestant (Germanicized) Christianity

    [I]slam is a more aggressive evolutionary strategy. In that sense it is a superior competitive strategy. That does not mean it produces a superior mankind. It mereley means it is more competitive.

    1) hatred is proscribed / hatred is prohibited
    2) punishment is prescribed / punishment is prohibited
    3) lies are permissible / lies are not permissible
    4) dual ethics / universal ethics
    5) respect a given / respect earned by actions.
    6) knowledge is fixed / knowledge evolves
    7) intolerance is required / intolerance is prohibited
    8) inbreeding is promoted / inbreeding is prohibited
    9) produces low trust societies / produces high trust societies
    10) produces ignorance and poverty / produces knowledge and prosperity.
    (….this list goes on forever)

    But, I don’t think of it as most folks do because I don’t rely on introspection. 

    I just look at the epistemic properties of each body of thought and I Compare their abilities to produce a high trust society and it’s corresponding innovation and wealth.

  • Islam vs Protestant (Germanicized) Christianity

    [I]slam is a more aggressive evolutionary strategy. In that sense it is a superior competitive strategy. That does not mean it produces a superior mankind. It mereley means it is more competitive.

    1) hatred is proscribed / hatred is prohibited
    2) punishment is prescribed / punishment is prohibited
    3) lies are permissible / lies are not permissible
    4) dual ethics / universal ethics
    5) respect a given / respect earned by actions.
    6) knowledge is fixed / knowledge evolves
    7) intolerance is required / intolerance is prohibited
    8) inbreeding is promoted / inbreeding is prohibited
    9) produces low trust societies / produces high trust societies
    10) produces ignorance and poverty / produces knowledge and prosperity.
    (….this list goes on forever)

    But, I don’t think of it as most folks do because I don’t rely on introspection. 

    I just look at the epistemic properties of each body of thought and I Compare their abilities to produce a high trust society and it’s corresponding innovation and wealth.

  • ISLAM VS (PROTESTANT) CHRISTIANITY Islam is a more aggressive evolutionary strat

    ISLAM VS (PROTESTANT) CHRISTIANITY

    Islam is a more aggressive evolutionary strategy. In that sense it is a superior competitive strategy. That does not mean it produces a superior mankind. It merley means it is more competitive.

    1) hatred is prescribed / hatred is prohibited

    2) punishment is prescribed / punishment is prohibited

    3) lies are permissible / lies are not permissible

    4) dual ethics / universal ethics

    5) respect a given / respect earned by actions.

    6) knowledge is fixed / knowledge evolves

    7) intolerance is required / intolerance is prohibited

    8) inbreeding is promoted / inbreeding is prohibited

    9) produces low trust societies / produces high trust societies

    10) produces ignorance and poverty / produces knowledge and prosperity.

    11) God favours the pious / God favours the productive

    (….this list goes on forever)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-30 10:28:00 UTC

  • WILL WE SEE A POST-RELIGIOUS FUTURE? Given that we see a decline in religiosity.

    WILL WE SEE A POST-RELIGIOUS FUTURE?

    Given that we see a decline in religiosity.

    ON ARATIONAL VS RATIONAL VS EMPIRICAL ETHICS

    – Rationalism (rational ethics) increases as IQ increases

    – Religiosity (arational ethics) increases as IQ decreases.

    – Impulsivity and crime increase as IQ decreases.

    – There is a positive correlation between non-criminality and religion as IQ decreases. (The whole “love” thing works really)

    – All that differs in people’s behavior is the justification for their actions.

    – All people justify their intuitions, they do not rationally choose moral behaviors.

    – So whether we are indoctrinated into an arational, or a rational ethic is one of whether we are able to practice arational or rational justifications.

    – And conversely, we require both arational and rational ethics to provide for people capable of arational and rational justification.

    – Just as we require virtue (imitative), rational (rule based), and empirical (outcome based) ethics for children, adults, and elders.

    ON 20th CENTURY PSEUDOSCIENCE

    Marxism, Freudianism, Socialism, Postmodernism, Feminism, Keyensian economics, Cantorian sets, Misesian economics, libertine libertarianism, neo-conservatism, are all pseudoscientific nonsense.

    Much of religion is mythical and arational in content, but produces highly desirable results. The purpose of monotheism was the conduct of warfare by pre-state peoples. From iran/india (the same peoples at the time) forward that is the purpose of religion: power.

    Just as the purpose of the 19th and 20th century philosophies was to produce ideologies that assisted in the seizure of political power.

    So while I am happy we had a reformation. And I am happy that we had Darwin, I am unhappy that the intuitionistic and operationalist revolutions failed – and allowed pseudoscience (lies) to replace myths (allegories).

    I wouldn’t be too impressed with myself by thinking the era of religion had passed. Democratic secular socialist humanism is just as nonsensical (as stated) as is any of the main religions of the earth.

    Dressing the emperor in new clothes does nothing to change his identity.

    I have a vision. That vision is to create the truthful society just as we created the scientific society(the anglo enlightenment), and before it the rational society (the hellenic enlightenment).

    And if we did that we would look at the pseudoscience, outright lies, and propaganda of the 20th century just as we look at the medieval period: an age of mysticism.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-30 09:51:00 UTC

  • LEVANT NOT BRAZIL. They are turning America into the levant- not Brazil How did

    LEVANT NOT BRAZIL.

    They are turning America into the levant- not Brazil

    How did I miss that?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-30 04:23:00 UTC

  • INEQUALITY the inequality amongst a people is determined by the inequality of th

    INEQUALITY

    the inequality amongst a people is determined by the inequality of their norms.

    Profound. We must drag our lower classes along like good parents or leave them to behave as abandoned children.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-30 04:03:00 UTC

  • The Church Amplified Western Civilization. It Did Not Create It.

    [T]he Church federalized the Aristocracy into The Christian Monarchies. And the Church amplified our hunter-gatherer lack of aggression. But that is very different from saying that the Church created western civilization. The Church was an amplifier, not a creator. The Church did good – but it has done both damage and good. And the enlightenment failed to overcome that damage. Our generation’s objective is to overcome the failure of the enlightenment, and overcome the damage of the church, and overcome the damage of the state that cast itself as a replacement for the church. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine Source: Curt Doolittle – THE CHURCH WAS AN AMPLIFIER NOT A CREATOR The…

  • The Church Amplified Western Civilization. It Did Not Create It.

    [T]he Church federalized the Aristocracy into The Christian Monarchies. And the Church amplified our hunter-gatherer lack of aggression. But that is very different from saying that the Church created western civilization. The Church was an amplifier, not a creator. The Church did good – but it has done both damage and good. And the enlightenment failed to overcome that damage. Our generation’s objective is to overcome the failure of the enlightenment, and overcome the damage of the church, and overcome the damage of the state that cast itself as a replacement for the church. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine Source: Curt Doolittle – THE CHURCH WAS AN AMPLIFIER NOT A CREATOR The…

  • Aristocratic Egalitarianism

    [T]o say that European Aristocracy is Egalitarian is somewhat of a tautology.  An aristocracy requires numbers, and has an interest in creating large numbers in a hierarchy of aristocratic peers.  So aristocracy is egalitarian – open to meritocratic entry.