Theme: Coercion

  • We can no more make natural law than we can make physical law. We can only make

    We can no more make natural law than we can make physical law.

    We can only make contracts or issue commands.

    Contracts are possible by natural law.

    Commands are violations of natural law.

    Contracts demand performance, compensation, restitution.

    Commands require performance but escape compensation and permit no restitution.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-02-02 23:59:00 UTC

  • Q&A: How Does Propertarianism Address Spanking?

    [A]s an economy. “The Cost Is In The Maintenance” Testimonialism tells us that “There exist no general rules without limits”. So to say we should never spank or always do something else, is an ‘immature’ or perhaps ‘unsophisticated’ ethic. Lets look at the four properties. FIVE FACTORS 0) the category of violation: violence(physicality), crime(theft), ethics(deceit), manners(impulsivity), morals(externality), (please note the sequence). 1) time preference (long term consequences), 2) knowledge of alternatives, 3) time demands (urgent threat vs raising calmest child), 4) exhaustion and frustration levels of the parent. I suspect that merely mentioning these properties is enough for you to put it together. It’s not very complicated. DISCUSSION 1) whenever possible choose the long term consequences. The long term consequences are that harming( using violence against) your children for any reason produces long term consequences. There are times when children know they are out of line. I am not a prohibitionist. There must exist some limit. Physicality should be a limit, not a practice. Thats what the research shows and I am convinced by it. 2) it is actually just as effective in most cases to deprive a child of attention and stimulation. This is the preferred method today – in no small part because we have big enough houses. As I understand it the beneficial line of demarcation is physicality. Cursing at mother (mother must be sacred), or using physicality warrants physicality. Everything else warrants deprivation rather than physicality. Why? Because punishment gives the child attention, and your anger means he or she ‘wins’ by controlling you. In other words, if your child wants attention and can get it, then he is punishing you for not paying him enough attention. After physicality, the next standard is lying. I think most of the time lying is impulsive, and if impulsive then deprivation is enough. After lying s Premeditation. Premeditation is a very bad sign in a child (impulsivity requires only training). Premeditation is not quite as bad as killing animals, but a danger sign. Harming others or animals through premeditation means you have a candidate serial killer on your hands. This requires professional help. So if we are trying to train children to have higher time preference (escape impulsivity) then this is a matter for deprivation. If we are trying to train children out of impulsive physicality – then calm retaliation is probably warranted. If we are trying to train children out of premeditation – then it is more than a question of spanking, it is one of diagnosis of what is ‘wrong’ that is causing it. My mother used to make me stand in a corner. I merely spoke to my daughter and that was enough to change her behavior We sent my son to his bedroom. I have spanked my son once, but it did no good. I usually use a tap on the bottom and that is all it takes. But we are a gene pool and there are other gene pools. My father was excessively violent and I fucking hated him for it. Mostly because it was unnecessary. Making my mother unhappy with me was punishment enough. 3) Deprivation requires time. Contrary to popular belief, children sort of just came along through most of our history, are fairly fragile until they are seven or eight, and were exposed (killed) if unwanted, and often killed by nature if insufficiently provided and cared for. (history is full of families the majority of whose children did not survive). 4) Deprivation requires patience, and energy. Frustrated and tired parenting is very difficult. How one punishes is one of the best measures of time preference. But one’s capacity for time preference is determined by exhaustion and frustration. So people with good mental and physical condition, and who have long (low) time preference tend to be better parents than those with poor mental and physical condition, and high(short) time preference. CLOSING This is the ‘economy’ of child rearing. A child is not purchased and held as lumber or bricks, but constantly maintained like an orchard. So the cost is in the maintenance, not in the purchase. wink emoticon Cheers Curt

  • Q&A: How Does Propertarianism Address Spanking?

    [A]s an economy. “The Cost Is In The Maintenance” Testimonialism tells us that “There exist no general rules without limits”. So to say we should never spank or always do something else, is an ‘immature’ or perhaps ‘unsophisticated’ ethic. Lets look at the four properties. FIVE FACTORS 0) the category of violation: violence(physicality), crime(theft), ethics(deceit), manners(impulsivity), morals(externality), (please note the sequence). 1) time preference (long term consequences), 2) knowledge of alternatives, 3) time demands (urgent threat vs raising calmest child), 4) exhaustion and frustration levels of the parent. I suspect that merely mentioning these properties is enough for you to put it together. It’s not very complicated. DISCUSSION 1) whenever possible choose the long term consequences. The long term consequences are that harming( using violence against) your children for any reason produces long term consequences. There are times when children know they are out of line. I am not a prohibitionist. There must exist some limit. Physicality should be a limit, not a practice. Thats what the research shows and I am convinced by it. 2) it is actually just as effective in most cases to deprive a child of attention and stimulation. This is the preferred method today – in no small part because we have big enough houses. As I understand it the beneficial line of demarcation is physicality. Cursing at mother (mother must be sacred), or using physicality warrants physicality. Everything else warrants deprivation rather than physicality. Why? Because punishment gives the child attention, and your anger means he or she ‘wins’ by controlling you. In other words, if your child wants attention and can get it, then he is punishing you for not paying him enough attention. After physicality, the next standard is lying. I think most of the time lying is impulsive, and if impulsive then deprivation is enough. After lying s Premeditation. Premeditation is a very bad sign in a child (impulsivity requires only training). Premeditation is not quite as bad as killing animals, but a danger sign. Harming others or animals through premeditation means you have a candidate serial killer on your hands. This requires professional help. So if we are trying to train children to have higher time preference (escape impulsivity) then this is a matter for deprivation. If we are trying to train children out of impulsive physicality – then calm retaliation is probably warranted. If we are trying to train children out of premeditation – then it is more than a question of spanking, it is one of diagnosis of what is ‘wrong’ that is causing it. My mother used to make me stand in a corner. I merely spoke to my daughter and that was enough to change her behavior We sent my son to his bedroom. I have spanked my son once, but it did no good. I usually use a tap on the bottom and that is all it takes. But we are a gene pool and there are other gene pools. My father was excessively violent and I fucking hated him for it. Mostly because it was unnecessary. Making my mother unhappy with me was punishment enough. 3) Deprivation requires time. Contrary to popular belief, children sort of just came along through most of our history, are fairly fragile until they are seven or eight, and were exposed (killed) if unwanted, and often killed by nature if insufficiently provided and cared for. (history is full of families the majority of whose children did not survive). 4) Deprivation requires patience, and energy. Frustrated and tired parenting is very difficult. How one punishes is one of the best measures of time preference. But one’s capacity for time preference is determined by exhaustion and frustration. So people with good mental and physical condition, and who have long (low) time preference tend to be better parents than those with poor mental and physical condition, and high(short) time preference. CLOSING This is the ‘economy’ of child rearing. A child is not purchased and held as lumber or bricks, but constantly maintained like an orchard. So the cost is in the maintenance, not in the purchase. wink emoticon Cheers Curt

  • Q&A: WHAT DOES PROPERTARIANISM SAY ABOUT PEDOPHILIA? (example of contrasting pro

    Q&A: WHAT DOES PROPERTARIANISM SAY ABOUT PEDOPHILIA?

    (example of contrasting propertarian analysis with psychological analysis)

    At the risk of entering into a field of landmines:

    As far as I know, pedophilia is a developmental disorder, that like homosexuality, psychopathy, and hoarding, is incurable.

    It has a high comorbidity with other (serious) mental illnesses. I suspect that the researchers will determine that it is caused by the excitement of the dominance response in those who have mental disorders that prevent experience of the dominance response.

    In other words, pedophiles can only get excited by something they can feel dominant over, and they are basically unable to feel dominance (sexual excitement) otherwise – at least as intensely.

    While it is understandable to be aroused by beautiful teenagers(fertility). It is not however, understandable to be aroused by children(non-fertile). Even if we say that the taboo is a learned response, obsession sufficient to prevent disassociation by experience of a constant normative taboo, requires mental illness to prevent that association.

    I have only known one pedophile tangentially (someone fairly senior ex-Microsoft), and there is something ‘not right’ about these people. This individual is highly passive aggressive, with the jewish paranoia that is common in that tribe, and has various other obsessive disorders – that just happen to be useful in writing software.

    They invoke my disgust and purity responses severely enough that I intuit the desperate need to kill them. (I am a a conservative libertarian after all, with heightened responses to such things.). I have the same reaction to child abuses, and wife-beaters.

    In my work I tend to rely on the ternary set of emotions: Dominance-submission, excitement-calm, pleasure-pain.

    And on the desire to acquire in all things without an cancelling loss. So I must be able to explain a behavior using these limited ‘operations’.

    So in my view pedophilia must be a defect since the ‘behavioral economy’ produces such incentives against it, since the interests are against it, and there is no acquisitive value in the behavior whatsoever.

    In other words, using the rough math of propertarianism, I can’t find a way for this to result in an acquisition. This is the value of propertarianism over empathic psychologism: one cannot so easily be fooled by cognitive biases.

    If this sounds like a diagnosis lacking in empathy, it is. But the universe is pretty mechanical. We feel things because they correspond with the demands of the universe. We humans are expressions of physical laws. We aren’t all that special. We just have memories that we can use to predict and therefore outwit the universe’s ‘slower’ and deterministic method of progress through time. (and we are victim of faster processes).

    Curt

    ( PS: I had not included a chapter on negatives in my book. This question suggest that I should include a few such examples. So John Black thank you for giving me one to work with. )


    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-27 02:57:00 UTC

  • THAT VIDEO MADE ME ANGRY. No conversions. Sterilize the Commons. Sterilize Repro

    THAT VIDEO MADE ME ANGRY.

    No conversions. Sterilize the Commons. Sterilize Reproduction. Renunciation and Integration. Leave. Deport. Or Die.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-24 04:34:00 UTC

  • War is politics by other means. It will not end. Any more than politics, product

    War is politics by other means. It will not end. Any more than politics, production of commons, production of goods, or reproduction.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-23 10:56:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/690850668375072769

    Reply addressees: @wef

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/690844036463206400


    IN REPLY TO:

    @wef

    What are the implications of artificial intelligence for the future of warfare? https://t.co/CbNVP0yFll #whatif #wef https://t.co/qdaWsKLIdk

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/690844036463206400

  • What about Disciplines? Coercion by Force, Coercion by Exchange, Coercion by wor

    What about Disciplines? Coercion by Force, Coercion by Exchange, Coercion by words – all continue.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-23 10:38:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/690846126690418688

    Reply addressees: @avyfain @atrembath @pmarca

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/690714027689807872


    IN REPLY TO:

    @avyfain

    .@atrembath @pmarca interesting how Mokyr & Gordon have such opposing views on the future. They’ve both been @NorthwesternU for a long time!

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/690714027689807872

  • Yeah. My guns are for hunting: hunting statists. Unfortunately, statist-hunting

    Yeah. My guns are for hunting: hunting statists. Unfortunately, statist-hunting seems to be limited to irregularly scheduled seasons. It’s unpredictable. But one must be prepared to seize the opportunity with fervor when it comes along. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-23 06:00:00 UTC

  • “Gun control is not about guns; it’s about control.”— Mike Miller @Libertarian

    —“Gun control is not about guns; it’s about control.”— Mike Miller @LibertarianMike


    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-23 05:58:00 UTC

  • You either have natural law, natural rights, and cooperation. Or you have unnatu

    You either have natural law, natural rights, and cooperation. Or you have unnatural law, arbitrary permission, and slavery.

    There really isn’t a choice.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-23 05:33:00 UTC