A profoundly interesting question: if you have the oath then why do you need Christian love?
That is the question I have been intuiting all year and I couldn’t put into a frame.
If you have martial love is that not the inverse of Christian love?
That was the question I was looking for.
It was out there.
I could sense it.
Took me a year.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-14 09:15:00 UTC
PSYCHOHISTORY vs NATURAL LAW and HUMAN LAW
(reposted for archival purposes)
Natural Law is that which is necessary for cooperation.
But there are other Human Laws of behavior. Whether we categorize these as natural laws as well is a matter of demarcation for the purpose of clarity.
I tend to avoid all psychologism, and I see psychohistory as damaged by freudianism.
But the concept that there are regular laws or cycles to human behavior seems a fertile ground for Human Laws.
I believe all these human laws can be expressed as property, acquisition, defense, and retaliation, and thereby escape the universalism, monopoly, and totalitarianism of freudian framing.
As such I see the basis of what is called psychohistory as correctable and arguable as objective and distributed, rather than subjective and divergent from fallacious monopoly norms.
When David introduced me to the subject I was only thinking in terms of incentives of each generation in the generational cycle.
But we can combine human, cultural, generational, and technological incentives into a hierarchical set of dependencies that should at some point of precision produce a predictable (within limits) set of trends in human behavior.
At present I think we are coalescing on the general theory that man’s behavior actually changes very little, that he adapts to incentives, and that all we have done is increase the information content of collective memory until we are able to produce general rules of action.
Curt
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-14 04:35:00 UTC
ABSOLUTELY GOLDEN
—“Anyone can be “brothers” in the sense that they can make a reciprocal exchange of kinship trust, and/or kinship altruism.
But the less akin they actually are, the more difficult and costly it will be to authenticate, to certify, and to guarantee that this exchange is a worthwhile exchange to make, and so the less likely it is to occur.
The purpose of “anti-racist” rhetoric is to force this transaction, either without reciprocity, or without warranty, so that it becomes, not an exchange, but a parasitic imposition”— Eli Harman
You See. I don’t lay it out there. Eli Does. Beautifully. Damn.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-13 11:16:00 UTC
THE LIBERTARIAN LIE: AN EXCUSE FOR FREE RIDING
The whole libertarian lie that man was oppressed rather than painfully and expensively genetically, culturally, socially, and economically pacified is merely an attempt to suggest we not pay for the very expensive commons needed to perform that pacification. Man is parasitic whether he engages in violence, theft, or free riding – anything other than voluntary exchange.
You can separate aristocracy from peasantry by this single question: was man oppressed (victim), or was man domesticated (barbarian)?
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-09 10:53:00 UTC
As an individual, you are nothing but an expensive life form unable to sustain your own life. Your actions and your opinions mean nothing. It is when we individuals act cooperatively to create the commons of liberty that we work to create what we call “individualism”: the allocation of property and discretionary use of it, to the individual, such that we make best use of all available knowledge at the lowest friction due to risk. The method by which we create individualism is the use of organized violence to prohibit all alternatives other than individualism. We prohibit all alternatives by natural law, rule of law, universal standing.
Property rights, individualism, and a condition of liberty, are created by the actions of man, in groups. They do not exist otherwise.
Everyone fights. No one quits. There is nothing in liberty that permits free riding.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-09 06:14:00 UTC
[O]bjective Morality consists of prohibitions on the impositions of costs upon others that would provide a disincentive for cooperation. We produce many norms that we treat as morality, just as we produce political commands that we treat as law. But norms are not necessarily moral, and legislation is rarely law. We also conflate heroism with morality. Which despite being two sides of the same coin, are opposites. Heroism consists in contributing to the commons. Morality in not privatizing the commons (parasitism). So an artist can be heroic or not, and an artist can be moral or not. He can be heroic and moral. He can be moral but not heroic. It is quite hard to be heroic and immoral. They tend to cancel each other out. So if an artist is not living parasitically, is producing art that is not immoral, and attempting to contribute to the commons, he is moral and heroic.
[O]bjective Morality consists of prohibitions on the impositions of costs upon others that would provide a disincentive for cooperation. We produce many norms that we treat as morality, just as we produce political commands that we treat as law. But norms are not necessarily moral, and legislation is rarely law. We also conflate heroism with morality. Which despite being two sides of the same coin, are opposites. Heroism consists in contributing to the commons. Morality in not privatizing the commons (parasitism). So an artist can be heroic or not, and an artist can be moral or not. He can be heroic and moral. He can be moral but not heroic. It is quite hard to be heroic and immoral. They tend to cancel each other out. So if an artist is not living parasitically, is producing art that is not immoral, and attempting to contribute to the commons, he is moral and heroic.
Thievery is a successful group evolutionary strategy. Some groups practice it purposefully.
Lying is a successful group evolutionary strategy. Some groups practice it purposefully.
Wishful thinking is another group evolutionary strategy. Some groups practice it purposefully.
Truth is an other group evolutionary strategy. Some groups practice it purposefully.
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-04 03:14:00 UTC
Danny Frederick
Re new freedom … paper.
Either I don’t understand your argument, it its false.
I can state negative shoulds but not positive.
Should not dis incentivize cooperation.
Meaning:
Freedom of inquiry but not of assertion.
Freedom of truthful expression but not freedom of false expression.
Freedom of exchange but not fraud.
Freedom of gift but not freedom of taking: theft.
Freedom of association and disassociation but not freedom of conspiracy.
What have I got wrong?
Source date (UTC): 2016-02-02 08:34:00 UTC
Of course people know me. I find reasons to compliment them. I make sure they remember me. This is how you build lots of options in your community. That short man with the beard who is friendly? Yes I know him. Some people hate it. Natural politicians love it. Watch Clinton. He’s the master of it. I was like this all my life.
Flip it around. How can you live in a town without making lots of friendly relationships?
Small town people. We were raised this way. To acknowledge not ignore. To make people feel safe, not distance ourselves from them.
To build a civic society. Not retreat from it.
Source date (UTC): 2016-01-27 10:10:00 UTC