Curt Doolittle

Theme: Deception

  • WHAT IS YOUR VIEW OF THE NATURE OF MAN? 1) What is the cost of producing falseho

    WHAT IS YOUR VIEW OF THE NATURE OF MAN?

    1) What is the cost of producing falsehood and fraud vs truthfulness and fully informed voluntary transfer?

    2) What is the demonstrated frequency of falsehood and fraud vs truthfulness and informed voluntary transfer?

    3) Does reputation gracefully or ungracefully degrade as population and anonymity increase? And what demonstrably occurred in history in response to it?

    4) Why is it that monopoly judiciaries always develop in every civilization?

    5) Why is it that Religion and Law evolved in the first place? Why did Hammurabi … the franks … it doesn’t matter … why did all legal systems evolve?

    6) The scope of torte law (law proper, not legislation) has increased over time and continues to increase incrementally over time. Why has it done so?

    7) Of the hypotheses of man, do you subscribe to the Rousseauian (gentle peaceful man in the state of nature), the Hobbesian (predatory man), or the Lockeian ( rational man, choosing predatory, parasitic, or productive as suits his interests)?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-09 09:57:00 UTC

  • “BAD IDEAS, HOWEVER SACRED, CANNOT SURVIVE THE COMPANY OF GOOD ONES FOREVER.”—

    –“BAD IDEAS, HOWEVER SACRED, CANNOT SURVIVE THE COMPANY OF GOOD ONES FOREVER.”— Sam Harris

    This statement is demonstrably false, primarily because the market for comforting falsehoods, is greater than the market for uncomfortable truths; and because the market for gossip that justifies one’s priors is greater than the market for uncomfortable truths that contradict one’s priors. Those are two empirically demonstrable statements that have been the subject of not insignificant study and debate.

    We could, instead say, that in the market for weapons of argument, usable on those subjects of argument – rather than gossip and propaganda – that more truthful (and therefore scientific) arguments defeat the less truthful (rational, reasonable, pseudo-rational, pseudoscientific, and supernatural).

    The problem we face is the difference in the scale and distribution of gossip, propaganda, justification and critical argument. Falsehood is a cheaper product than truth.

    In other words, as intellectuals we cannot for a moment cast ourselves as ‘average persons’.

    A third of the electorate (market for political choice) is fully committed to the dysgenic and feminine reproductive strategy (the left) and a third fully committed to the eugenic and masculine reproductive strategy (the right), and the third in the middle is not only uncommitted, but unconcerned, and largely uninformed, and demonstrably persuaded by what they empathize with, obtain information from friends (gossip), are exposed to the media (propaganda), and lack the general knowledge to engage in argument. (See The Myth of the Rational Voter).

    Imagining that the way you think is somehow average rather than one of a host of possible outliers, is merely demonstration of the various cognitive social biases wherein we attribute to others in general what applies to us in particular.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-07 16:20:00 UTC

  • Assange. Wikileaks. I love you. Thank you

    Assange. Wikileaks. I love you. Thank you.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-07 11:37:00 UTC

  • I think the problem is that the past was honest but justified it supernaturally,

    ….I think the problem is that the past was honest but justified it supernaturally, because the promise of reward was after death. Whereas the present is dishonest and justified pseudo-scientifically and promised if we can reach a socialist utopia or some variation thereof. The medieval order was hierarchical and honest. The only false promise was after death. We live in a world of loneliness and lies….

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-04 07:24:00 UTC

  • Curious…. Outside of the natural sciences, engineering, computer science, and

    Curious…. Outside of the natural sciences, engineering, computer science, and mathematics, does the academy teach anything that can’t be reduced to some form of lying, cheating, and stealing?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-01 16:12:00 UTC

  • CONSPIRACY THEORISTS…. Look, People don’t possess all that much agency. I mean

    CONSPIRACY THEORISTS….

    Look,

    People don’t possess all that much agency.

    I mean you gonna stop women from cognitive bias of NAXALT?

    You think your favorite (((they))) knows what they’re doing?

    You think you’re going to teach any people their most beloved traditions and values are actually damaging to themselves and us?

    You think people in a major corporations need to conspire to screw you over?

    You think the financial sector actually knows what its doing? Maybe a handful of them to at some level – and we should kill them for it.

    You think that government employees need to conspire to do something awful?

    They don’t. All of us pursue the goods we understand and we either make excuses for, discount, ignore, are willfully ignorant of, or are entirely ignorant of, the consequences. Why? Cause we all gotta feel we did something, and we gotta prove to someone we did something, and a lotta something’s in concert all over the world produce a whole lot of excused, discounted, ignored, or oblivious consequences

    People follow incentives.

    We create some pretty ridiculous incentives for people to follow.

    Believe it or not, its the hardest thing we do.

    Why? cause we’re all not that bright and those that are, are mostly evil.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-01 16:04:00 UTC

  • We are prosecutors. Why? We have taken away the benefit of the doubt under which

    We are prosecutors. Why? We have taken away the benefit of the doubt under which the first great lie of the Jews (christianity), and the second great lie of the jews (marxism/ socialism/ libertarianism/ neoconservatism) has infected the west and which we still seek to escape from.

    Propertarianism only asks whether you speak truthfully and warranty your statements, and whether you bear a cost or earn a profit, or cause a cost or earn a profit by the argument you make.

    We have ended the great lies.

    You no longer have the benefit of the doubt. We no longer seek justification for you to avoid blame, we seek survival from criticism, as your warranty, and resulting out come as your guilt or innocence.

    In public speech, you are guilty until found not guilty.

    That is what you have done.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-28 16:31:00 UTC

  • Who masters lying? The Chinese lie the most – and poorly. The Steppe people a bi

    Who masters lying?

    The Chinese lie the most – and poorly.

    The Steppe people a bit less – but a bit better.

    The Semites – arab and jew – lie the best and with consistency.

    The British lie the most politely

    The French are just uncooperative and hostile, not liars.

    The Germans don’t lie they walk away from liars.

    The Americans don’t lie so much as believe nonsense things, and punish the hell out of liars.

    You wanna know the real problem between the american state and the Russian? Americans prosecute liars, and Russians rebel against utopians by lying.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-26 11:55:00 UTC

  • “you’re no philosopher!”— First, ridicule, rallying and shaming is (a) feminin

    —“you’re no philosopher!”—

    First, ridicule, rallying and shaming is (a) feminine, (b) marxist, (c) demonstration of the failure of one’s ability to construct arguments (d) demonstration of the failure of one’s ideology.

    I qualify for having increased decidability and explanatory power in my domain of inquiry. That is what qualifies one as a philosopher. Sorry. Just how it is.

    I probably qualify for merely explaining the reason why Mises failed along with Brouwer and Bridgman. But certainly for explaining the relationship between them, popper and hayek. And for solving the problem hayek couldn’t complete, by translating rothbard’s ghetto legal ethics, and hoppe’s kantian rationalist ethics, into anglo empirical and scientific language. A language that can be used to construct proofs – what hoppe was trying to construct.

    So again, you don’t have an argument, right? You are just another crypto-marxist begging for free redistribution of the productivity of others by parasitic consumption of and free-riding upon the commons they produce, rather than directly upon the productivity of what they originally produce?

    Right? That’s what you demonstrate that you do? You’re just another crypto marxist with a different strategy for parasitism. Andyou defend your parasitism with ridicule rallying and shaming beause you, like women, cannot face the truth of your fantasies: you beg for free riding as a claim against the productivity of others.

    I eat you libertine munchkins like pringles with beer. lol

    Bend over.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-23 13:04:00 UTC

  • (yes I know, i’m wasting my time, but damn, it’s fun to make libertines my b–ch

    (yes I know, i’m wasting my time, but damn, it’s fun to make libertines my b–ch.)

    Rik Moore You do realize you are a complete joke in libertarian circles. Just a complete joke.

    Curt Doolittle You do realize that libertarians are a complete joke everywhere except libertarian circles. lol

    And your attempts at shaming in order to avoid arguments demonstrate the reason libertarianism failed: its only suitable for not-so-bright young males that can’t get laid. 😉

    Rik Moore Well I don’t have to move to Ukraine to flash a couple of $20 bills around to get laid, that’s for sure.

    Curt Doolittle Dude, I did just fine here in the states… ’cause I’m not a douchebag, and I”m accomplished, and good looking, and interesting, so I did better than you ever will.

    I mean you rally and shame like a pussy, you argue like a pussy, you look like a pussy … and if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it’s a duck. lol. You’re a pussy.

    I love trash talking douchebags. It’s a cheap display of dominance. It gives me an excuse to demonstrate the pubescent idiocy of libertinism, and it’s free advertising, and it gives my friends a laugh.

    I mean, I don’t really mind USING you as my bitch. It’s kind of fun and it’s profitable so to speak. lol But it’s like you just can’t help but VOLUNTEER to be my bitch. It’s like you walk up and bend over and hand me a bar of soap. Damn.

    Like lemmings.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-23 12:23:00 UTC