Curt Doolittle

Theme: Deception

  • (Worth Repeating) —-“There is a reason the strong can speak their minds honest

    (Worth Repeating)

    —-“There is a reason the strong can speak their minds honestly and truthfully: only the weak need do otherwise.”—-

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 16:37:00 UTC

  • Slayer of false gods, false promises, pseudoscience, shoddy argument, and justif

    Slayer of false gods, false promises, pseudoscience, shoddy argument, and justification of priors.

    Sigh.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 16:07:00 UTC

  • WHY DO YOU FEAR THE TRUTH? ( Cold Mirror, Asgeir Theodor, Josh Jeppson ) It’s no

    WHY DO YOU FEAR THE TRUTH?

    ( Cold Mirror, Asgeir Theodor, Josh Jeppson )

    It’s not that I don’t understand. Its that I have failed as yet to help you understand. And while I may continue to fail, but I will try until I am at least comfortable, that I can do no better at trying.

    ARGUMENT:

    Militia, Heroism, Sovereignty, Jury, Truthfulness, Science, Sanctity of Nature, have produced the common interest, high trust, competitive excellence, and economic velocity that made western man surpass competitors in both the ancient medieval and modern world..

    We can stack argumentative techniques by effectiveness of persuasion, largely because elites are copied by their followers, and the rest of the population is organized by those elites using law, commerce, and moral speech.

    1 – Sentimental Expression (justification of moral and reproductive biases)

    2 – Mythical analogy (justification)

    3 – Moral/Religious Argument (justification)

    4 – Rational argument (justification)

    5 – Historical analogy (justification)

    6 – Economic (correlative) argument.

    7 – Empirical (causal argument – criticism)

    8 – Existentially Descriptive (scientific and truthful argument – criticism)

    Each of these maps roughly to a difference of a half standard deviation in IQ. With the upper classes that organize society (re: Pareto – the upper 20%, led by the upper 1%) utilizing the highest means of argument and the lower classes using the lower forms of argument.

    The lower classes are DIRECTED, they are not themselves capable of leadership. So they require we USE the lower forms of argument in inciting them to ACTION, but we do not organize the upper classes by sentiment, we organize them by their means of argument – almost all of which is empirical.

    So psychology is used by ideology in order to inspire the lower classes to action. While facts are used by the upper classes to determine the means of organizing and reorganizing the lower classes through law and violence, moral speech and gossip, and material incentive.

    But upper (meaning middle, upper middle, and elites) classes merely USE the lower classes by giving them inspirations caused by incentives.

    That does not mean that the upper classes rely upon the same arguments. It means they tell narratives, myths and fantasies to the lower classes in order to inspire them.

    The problem is not in inspiring the lower classes. The problem is in developing a means by which to enact and sustain a change in the status quo.

    So those things that inspire people being to the discipline of preferences – aesthetics. They do not belong to epistemology, ethics, politics. Those are domains of TRUTH independent of our preferences. Aesthetics is the discipline in which we USE truth and psychology together to achieve PREFERRED ends.

    NET: if we eliminate by violence (law) deceitful methods, we are left with truthful methods only available to us. We can create religions but they cannot be constructed of lies. WE can create ideologies, but they cannot be falsely constructed.

    I think truth is enough. It demonstrably has been.

    REVERSAL

    Conversely, if a man is not capable of motivation to transcendence by the truth, then how is he not incapable of transcendence if he fears the truth and requires untruth?

    In other words: by stating that truth is not enough, you say you are already sub-human, and in need of dominance by your betters.

    SO I UNDERSTAND

    I understand that the lower classes need to be led by inspiration. I also understand that transcendence – to leave the subhumans behind, requires that we abandon comforting lies that exist to assuage our weaknesses.

    If truth is not enough for you, then you cannot transcend and become fully human, and in doing so, become a god.

    Instead, one is just another weak woman at the mercy of chemistry she cannot master, or an impulsive imbeclile who lives in fear of the universe.

    So you see, I see your form of arguments as weakness. Not of strength. Of cowardice, not of heroism. Not of intelligence but of animal impulse. Not of truth, but of justification for failure.

    Religions are for the majority peasantry. Cults are for the minority who are desperate. Truth is enough for aristocracy because they have the courage to confront and dominate a hostile universe that has no interest in man or his joys, but which seeks to end him. Truth is enough for ruling the peasantry. Truth is enough for transcendence. Truth is enough for aristocracy. Truth is enough for gods. Because that is what gods are: omniscient and omnipotent.

    THE END OF THE ARGUMENT

    As far as I know you cannot exit this argument except to admit that you are weak.

    If you choose to abandon your weakness, and have the courage then I welcome your advice and counsel. If you remain a coward, hiding behind germanic attempts to restate Christianity in pagan language, or to restate paganism in christian language, then I think you are not really worthy of my time and effort.

    I spend time on people to make bets. Very few bets pay. I need only a handful that do. Every other man who follows will do so out of incentives not necessarily understanding. And that is the domain of elites: rule.

    Cheers

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian institute,

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 07:39:00 UTC

  • “Dem Debate: – Sanders: I’m going to give away tons of free stuff mahk mah wowds

    –“Dem Debate:

    – Sanders: I’m going to give away tons of free stuff mahk mah wowds

    – Hillary: I’m going to give away even MORE free stuff, AND I’m a WOMAN.

    – Unknown Candidate #1: I guess I’ll give away free stuff, too.

    – Unknown Candidate #2: Yeap, me too. Free stuff for everyone.

    – Unknown Candidate #3: Ditto. Free stuff.”–

    (from James Louis LaSalle )

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-14 08:45:00 UTC

  • TRUSTWORTHINESS OF HISTORIANS? History is a discipline. That discipline can be p

    TRUSTWORTHINESS OF HISTORIANS?

    History is a discipline.

    That discipline can be pursued objectively(truthfully) or subjectively (falsely).

    As far as I know, truthfulness is the most moral and trustworthy demonstration possible.

    History tells me:

    – That Man is a predator who cooperates when it’s to his advantage and preys when it s to his advantage.

    – That cooperation under risk is an expensive and intolerable burden. And that conquest to reduce risk is rational and evident.

    – That the empowerment of competitors appears not to produce beneficial returns.

    – That conquest has lead to prosperity by the centralization of rents in exchange for the suppression of local rents and parasitism, and the consequent decline in local transaction costs.

    – That his history is one of increasing aggression.

    – That increasing aggression made cooperation more preferable.

    – That to attribute change in incentives to change in man himself is the fallacy of wishful thinking.

    – That if we act as if man has changed rather than his incentives that we will be conquered by the next higher wave of aggression.

    – And that the only means of preserving cooperation is to preserve the incentives to cooperate rather than prey upon one another. Not to construct, preserve or advocate a fallacious history or properties of man.

    So I suggest the opposite: that a man is both untrustworthy and dangerous if he advocates falsehoods even If he casts them as noble lies.

    The search for blame in history is generally not reversible. Like religion it is a self satisfying means of resenting the envy of the status quo. And that we can but learn how not to repeat past mistakes of conquest or defeat by making incentives for conquest and defeat impossible.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-14 04:00:00 UTC

  • Let me help you. The purpose of surveys is to frame opinion. Don’t be daft

    Let me help you. The purpose of surveys is to frame opinion. Don’t be daft.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-13 07:35:00 UTC

  • Under testimonialism, Pelosi wouldn’t be able to utter words in public

    Under testimonialism, Pelosi wouldn’t be able to utter words in public.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-11 10:24:00 UTC

  • THE MEANING OF COMPLIMENTS I can think something is sentimentally, allegorically

    THE MEANING OF COMPLIMENTS

    I can think something is sentimentally, allegorically, morally, or rationally moral, beautiful or heroic. Meaning that I agree with your sentiments.

    I can admire your attempt at creating an argument – even if you fail.

    But that is different from whether your justification is amoral, or whether you facts are questionable, or whether your judgements are biased, or whether you are engaging in wishful thinking, or whether you engage in verbalism, cunning or deceit, or whether you logic is faulty whether or your argument is necessary, or whether whether it is existentially possible, logically sound, parsimonious my stated and so forth.

    Meaning I can agree with you sentiments. I can encourage your learning. I can support your attempts.

    But I cannot claim that you have constructed a truth candidate.

    And most often what people want is confirmation that their sentiments are classifiable as a truth.

    The truth is rarely emotionally rewarding.

    It just is.

    So that is why I am supportive of good people in their journey.

    But it is also why I will often agree with your sentiments, values and objectives while at the same time faulting your arguments.

    If anything, philosophy is reducible to the science of construction truthful statements in pursuit of truth, whether we like that truth ir not.

    Conveniently, the secret of the west’s competitive advantage is our discovery and frequent use of the truth.

    So when we share a moral bias against the liars and deceives who have destroyed our civilization, we are pursuing the reconstruction of a truthful civil society and the commons we can create from it.

    So we agree on our feelings:,we desire truth.

    But stating that feeling truthfully is almost impossible. And I might argue that before my work it was not possible.

    But now it is. And it is quite simple: we never know the truth but we can clean our language of error bias wishful thinking and deceit with some effort.

    And we can require it of others I public speech.

    And we can punish offenders.

    And we can clean ourselves and others of falsehoods.

    Leaving only truth behind.

    This is the greatest transformation of man since Darwin if not since the enlightenment.

    Welcome to the revolution.

    A sentiment we can all share.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-08 13:35:00 UTC

  • Q&A: WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY LOADING, FRAMING, AND OVERLOADING? —“Curt, you talk a

    Q&A: WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY LOADING, FRAMING, AND OVERLOADING?

    —“Curt, you talk about ‘loading and framing’ a lot. I have an idea of what you are talking about, but I’m wondering if you could provide a link to something to help me flesh out my understanding of the topic.”— Ed Hertzog

    Ed Hertzog:

    Great Question.

    -Framing:-

    There are a limited number of causal axis the mind can resolve into a consistent judgement without falling back on introspection – in other words, it is easy to overload our ability to reason with causal density.

    When we are overloaded by the frame, we abandon reason and resort to intuition – moral intuition.

    When we resort to moral intuition we resort to our metaphysical value judgements.

    This is a form of suggestion. Humans are very suggestible. Tremendously so. Do some research. Reason is limited. That’s why we had to invent math, logic, and science.

    (Hence why I constructed Testimonialism scientifically)

    -Loading-

    Loading is the art of attaching value judgements to facts. This is another form of suggestion. Because communication requires we use a sympathetic process, it is possible to use suggestion to load an argument with value judgements.

    (Hence why I constructed propertarianism amorally.)

    -Overloading-

    Saturating the discourse, or environment, with propaganda, or false-evidence. False propaganda is inexpensive under mass communication, and defeating fallacious arguments is expensive. We are subject to environmental suggestion.

    (Hence why I have outlawed unscientific political speech from the commons.)

    Protect the informational commons using the same rule of law we use to protect all other commons – including property rights themselves.

    You can research Chomsky and Lakoff (both masters of lying, which is why they understand the topic). But you will find that they seek to USE it rather than prohibit it. I do the opposite. Prohibit it. Fraud is fraud. No matter how elegant.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-08 10:41:00 UTC

  • Ashkenazi Colonialism: Eastern Europe Had Anarchism – And the People Suffered Under Despotism

    [C]ontext: My objective is to falsify if not quash and destroy the Anglo, German, and Jewish Enlightenments, as deceptive, erroneous, and catastrophic failures to generalize group evolutionary strategies, so that I may explain the next step in our political evolution: to replace monopoly government (majority rule) with the combination of strictly constructed, objectively moral, universal, rule of law, with a political market for the voluntary production of commons wherein we replace majority assent with minority dissent only possible by legal means. Hence I attack the anglo equalitarian, german rationalist, and jewish pseudoscientific systems of thought. While science has invalidated the anglo over the past two decades, and propertarian philosophy has allowed me to invalidated the german because of the 20th century advances in the philosophy of science, it has taken me longer to understand why the jewish means of propaganda (deception) is so effective at deceiving the pathological altruism of western europeans. This post is another in the series on the origins of jewish propagandism (loading, framing, overloading and suggesting suicidal actions.) [M]y interest in anarchism evaporated after a few months of living in Ukraine. Because Eastern Europe is where the Cosmopolitan authors got their ideas – from practicing it. A minority managing and preying upon society through privatization of commons produced by conqueror’s military action, but not paid for by the managers themselves. In other words, Cosmopolitan Anarchism is a dishonest attempt to restore the predation of private ownership prosecuted by the Jews against eastern Europe under the protection of external military conquerors (austrian, lithiania, poland, muscovy). In more accurate terms: Ashkenazi Colonialism. Wherein an administrative class is effectively hired to parasitically manage a conquered people and territory. We see this pattern in Iraq, where the same people have formed the administrative (bureaucratic) layer for the Bathist regime. We saw this in Russia where the same people formed the ideological and administrative layer for the Soviets – and the slaughter of the people. We see this in america where the same people have formed the propaganda layer (previously the priesthood) in academy and media for the imperial and colonial american state, and the combined neo-puritain, socialist, libertine, and neo-conservative agendas. In his book “The Fatal Embrace” author “Benjamin Ginsburg” argues that the jews must end their ongoing strategy of allying with the state as a means of oppressing the people, because in every case it results in their exclusion or extermination. —“Thus, over the past several centuries, Jews have played important roles in the construction of absolutist, liberal, and socialist states as well as major parts in movements seeking to reform or supplant regimes to which they were unable to obtain access. Jews have traditionally offered their services to the state in exchange for the regime’s guarantee of security and opportunity. Ironically, however, precisely this relationship between Jews and the state has often sparked organized anti-Semitic attacks.”— (See: http://www.amazon.com/Fatal-Embrace-Jews-State/dp/0226296652/) Anarchism is an ode to lost predation on the serfs of Eastern Europe just like James Bond is an ode to lost empire: they’re both fictions, and late twentieth century action movies are an ode to America’s lost moral high ground. “Voluntary-everything” is equivalent to Lawlessness. It is another great deception like Marxism and neoconservatism: a half truth preying upon the optimistic moral bias of western aristocratic egalitarians and their pathological altruism. Liberty, meaning the ability to do as you with without imposing costs upon others, is a product of the rule of law. And the only principle means of decidability for law that can possibly produce a condition of liberty is the prohibition on the imposition of costs, which we express as property rights, and the scope of those rights evolves in parallel to the evolution of the means of imposing costs that is the product of the expansion of technologies, methods of cooperation, and the division of labor. And we seek parasitism because it is much easier and more rewarding than production. So a few moral men rally to prohibit these parasitisms so that they and all can prosper. Those few men impose rule of law on an immoral population. These men constitute the western aristocracy. Rule of law. Nomocracy. The prohibition on the imposition of costs that result in free riding on the productivity of others. Aristocracy is the only source of liberty.