Curt Doolittle

Theme: Deception

  • Name Calling Doolittle Number 9999999999….

    Feb 3, 2020, 3:33 PM

    —“I don’t know how many things you’ve been accused of being, but here’s one you might find interesting.🤣”— A Friend

    (re: doolittle) ….—“He’s a wannabe Nassim Taleb. He’s trying to re invent stoicism.”–Sabo Vojvodic

    LOL…. That’s pretty much missing the ballpark.. by a few continents… I did work on religion for a year, and did push for stoicism as one of the answers to mindfulness – until I understood it’s the stoic method of discipline but not it’s virtues. So, it’s really just a matter of complexity. People don’t have a frame for Propertarianism other than ideology, philosophy. If I sold red lollipops people would understand Red Lollipops. If I sold something trivial like “The NAP”, people would understand Red-Lollipop NAP. But I sell, a methodology producing a universally commensurable value natural vocabulary, grammar, and logic across all fields, a table of grammars explaining all paradigms of communication, an explanation of the means of undermining western civilization by the use of abrahamic method of deception – the polar opposite of aristotelian testimony – a method of falsifying testimony using that language to complete the scientific method, the formal logic of the psychological and social sciences, uniting hard and soft sciences, the strict construction of law, using that language and method, a constitution restoring the american constitution and the foundations of western civilization; and and explanation for the success of western civilization and the failure or stagnation or decline of other civilizations. Ok. So. We’ve had a the socrates(criticis) plato(justificationism) aristotle (falsificaton) program; The paul-whomever-augustine program; the Bacon-Locke-smith-hume program to restore aristotle, the rousseau-Kantian-german idealist program (thru Heidegger) to undermine aristotle, and the marxist-postmodernist-feminist-denialist program to undermine the entire western tradition again. And in my view im’ completing the hilbert-brouwer/bridgman-maxwell-darwin-crick-menger-popper-kuhn-hayek program that was interrupted by the war, and the invasion of the west by the marxists and jews. And for some reason it’s hard to imagine that P is on the same scale as Aristotle – When, it’s really just rewriting and completing Aristotle’s project in fully scientific prose. (Not that it was my intention. It’s just the outcome.) So yeah. It’s waaaaaay too much for people to understand P if they don’t know the history of thought.’

  • They Always Want to Lie Cheat and Steal – Becaues They Don”t Want to Self-Police (they Have No Agency)

    Feb 4, 2020, 4:01 PM

    —“Ok the way the comments are here maybe you should call it totalitarianism. If the is what you want to do thats fine but take that shit to a deserted island and have at it”–John Lafferty

    Your only objection to natural law is to say that you have the right to impose costs upon others against their will. It means you want to lie, cheat, steal. So it means you’re a bad person. That’s all natural law prevents: lying, cheating, stealing, harming, directly or indirectly. SO why do you want to preserve lying, cheating, stealing, and harm? So you can lie cheat steal and harm?

  • They Always Want to Lie Cheat and Steal – Becaues They Don”t Want to Self-Police (they Have No Agency)

    Feb 4, 2020, 4:01 PM

    —“Ok the way the comments are here maybe you should call it totalitarianism. If the is what you want to do thats fine but take that shit to a deserted island and have at it”–John Lafferty

    Your only objection to natural law is to say that you have the right to impose costs upon others against their will. It means you want to lie, cheat, steal. So it means you’re a bad person. That’s all natural law prevents: lying, cheating, stealing, harming, directly or indirectly. SO why do you want to preserve lying, cheating, stealing, and harm? So you can lie cheat steal and harm?

  • “You Frame Everything as ….”

    Feb 5, 2020, 3:41 PM (important)(very choice words below)

    —“You stick all issues into a narrow narrative of,, destroying western civilization” and, in my opinion, this makes you overlook any other motivations of movements such as marxism and pomo”—Vlad Popescu

    How long have you been following me? What’s the difference between (a) Judaism > Christianity > Islam and (b) Fundamentalism > Marxism > Feminism > Postmodernism? The only difference is the use of the abrahamic method of deceit in the ancient world using sophism and the supernatural, and the abrahamic method of deceit in the modern world, using sophism and pseudoscience. Otherwise it’s the same technique: False promise, baiting into hazard. Whether you promise the impossible and unwarrantable after death or after revolution is immaterial. They are impossible and unwarrantable. I mean, that’s why i’m so hostile to christanity’s use of the abrahamic method – it teaches people not only to be vulnerable to lies, but to apply the technique of lying to their own speech.

    —“Just as I said, you appoint every movement that you dislike(or so it seems) the goal of deceiving. Remember Descartes when he said he often ridiculed other countries’ social norms, but then he thought that his social norms may be seen as ridicule from the outside? Point is, you cannot claim to understand marxism and poststructuralism if you do not dive deep into them, leaving all the prejudices aside. And that s what i love about so called,, western culture “, the tradition of doubting the soundness of your own beliefs. And I agree that Marxism-Leninism(not marxism în general) is mistaking by pretending that a voluntary, somewhat forced revolution will bring progress towards a new stage of the economy, surpassing capitalism even though the material conditions of our age cannot allow for that”—Vlad Popescu

    I don’t like them because they’re deceptions – it’s not that I label them as deceptions because I don’t like them. You must be new. I don’t opine on whether statements are reciprocal(truthful) or not. statements are truthful (reciprocal) regardless of what opinion I hold. Do you know when you’re lying? How much agency do you have? Your children? The women you know? How much agency do they really have? How much are they just imitation machines doing what they have learned to imitate? The fact that the abrahamic method of deceit is as advanced a method of deception as the Aristotelian method of testimony, is simply a technical fact. The fact that the monotheistic religions’ attacks on market religion and norms (paganism), and the monopoly pseudoscientific attacks on market philosophy and laws, use the same technique of attempting to reverse voluntary markets with involuntary monopoly authority using false promise of life after death or false promise of economic, status, and power rewards after revolution, is a trivial distinction that varies only a subtle alteration of the lie. Western civ developed math, reason, science, technology, engineering, medicine, and dragged mankind out of ignorance, hard labor, poverty, suffering, and disease in just a few centuries in the bronze, ancient, and modern worlds. And it’s rather obviously due to the degree of correspondence of our metaphysics (realism, naturalism, operationalism, reciprocity) and our group strategy (sovereignty), and the social order of markets in everything, including jury, tripartism, trifunctionalism, and meritocracy. So because people vote with their feet, the evidence is pretty clear that they want the result of the western method even if they don’ want to bear the cost of persisting it.

  • “You Frame Everything as ….”

    Feb 5, 2020, 3:41 PM (important)(very choice words below)

    —“You stick all issues into a narrow narrative of,, destroying western civilization” and, in my opinion, this makes you overlook any other motivations of movements such as marxism and pomo”—Vlad Popescu

    How long have you been following me? What’s the difference between (a) Judaism > Christianity > Islam and (b) Fundamentalism > Marxism > Feminism > Postmodernism? The only difference is the use of the abrahamic method of deceit in the ancient world using sophism and the supernatural, and the abrahamic method of deceit in the modern world, using sophism and pseudoscience. Otherwise it’s the same technique: False promise, baiting into hazard. Whether you promise the impossible and unwarrantable after death or after revolution is immaterial. They are impossible and unwarrantable. I mean, that’s why i’m so hostile to christanity’s use of the abrahamic method – it teaches people not only to be vulnerable to lies, but to apply the technique of lying to their own speech.

    —“Just as I said, you appoint every movement that you dislike(or so it seems) the goal of deceiving. Remember Descartes when he said he often ridiculed other countries’ social norms, but then he thought that his social norms may be seen as ridicule from the outside? Point is, you cannot claim to understand marxism and poststructuralism if you do not dive deep into them, leaving all the prejudices aside. And that s what i love about so called,, western culture “, the tradition of doubting the soundness of your own beliefs. And I agree that Marxism-Leninism(not marxism în general) is mistaking by pretending that a voluntary, somewhat forced revolution will bring progress towards a new stage of the economy, surpassing capitalism even though the material conditions of our age cannot allow for that”—Vlad Popescu

    I don’t like them because they’re deceptions – it’s not that I label them as deceptions because I don’t like them. You must be new. I don’t opine on whether statements are reciprocal(truthful) or not. statements are truthful (reciprocal) regardless of what opinion I hold. Do you know when you’re lying? How much agency do you have? Your children? The women you know? How much agency do they really have? How much are they just imitation machines doing what they have learned to imitate? The fact that the abrahamic method of deceit is as advanced a method of deception as the Aristotelian method of testimony, is simply a technical fact. The fact that the monotheistic religions’ attacks on market religion and norms (paganism), and the monopoly pseudoscientific attacks on market philosophy and laws, use the same technique of attempting to reverse voluntary markets with involuntary monopoly authority using false promise of life after death or false promise of economic, status, and power rewards after revolution, is a trivial distinction that varies only a subtle alteration of the lie. Western civ developed math, reason, science, technology, engineering, medicine, and dragged mankind out of ignorance, hard labor, poverty, suffering, and disease in just a few centuries in the bronze, ancient, and modern worlds. And it’s rather obviously due to the degree of correspondence of our metaphysics (realism, naturalism, operationalism, reciprocity) and our group strategy (sovereignty), and the social order of markets in everything, including jury, tripartism, trifunctionalism, and meritocracy. So because people vote with their feet, the evidence is pretty clear that they want the result of the western method even if they don’ want to bear the cost of persisting it.

  • You Can’t Stop Noticing

    Feb 7, 2020, 9:22 PM

    —“I must give you credit, because once you notice the relatively subtle methods of deceit through framing, etc., you can’t stop noticing, and it can be tremendously valuable. Even in legal brief-writing. “Your Honor, notice how they attempted to deceive you by….” … People are too accustomed to thinking of deceit only in terms of outright lies. But the other methods of deceit are crucial to understand as well. You have been instrumental in my understanding of those.— A Friend.

    Hugs brother. It’s hard to believe the promise we make, that if you learn P, it will influence you – and once you understand how the deceits are constructed you see them everywhere. And if you can see and name a thing, you can defeat a thing.

  • You Can’t Stop Noticing

    Feb 7, 2020, 9:22 PM

    —“I must give you credit, because once you notice the relatively subtle methods of deceit through framing, etc., you can’t stop noticing, and it can be tremendously valuable. Even in legal brief-writing. “Your Honor, notice how they attempted to deceive you by….” … People are too accustomed to thinking of deceit only in terms of outright lies. But the other methods of deceit are crucial to understand as well. You have been instrumental in my understanding of those.— A Friend.

    Hugs brother. It’s hard to believe the promise we make, that if you learn P, it will influence you – and once you understand how the deceits are constructed you see them everywhere. And if you can see and name a thing, you can defeat a thing.

  • Ruining Good Art Is Explicitly Written in The Goals for Communism

    Ruining Good Art is explicitly written in the goals for communism:

    23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.” https://www.citizenreviewonline.org/2010/Jun/communism.html —Alfred Wittmann

  • Ruining Good Art Is Explicitly Written in The Goals for Communism

    Ruining Good Art is explicitly written in the goals for communism:

    23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.” https://www.citizenreviewonline.org/2010/Jun/communism.html —Alfred Wittmann

  • re: Jackson Crawford, Tyr vs. Odin as Chief God

    Feb 24, 2020, 4:29 PM In order to suppress controversy you’re overstating your case. You’re representing sources, because under the defensive protection of the scientific method, we don’t hypothesize without evidence. Meanwhile I think Dumezil and the rest of us are interested in the evolution of european natural religion over time. To claim we can’t use etymology which is about as close to genetic evidence that we come, is rather unscientific, and to claim we can’t apply the same method of analysis to mythology is also. And to claim the popularity of the farmer’s god over the ruling class’ god in a tripartite hierarchical society given the difference in those demographics isn’t scientific either. Every mythos we know of evolved like every political and legal technology and every narrative technology by rules similar to language. Every mythic tradition is subject to the same forensics. So you’re creating conflict where there isn’t any. It is very hard to argue that Odin didn’t rise to prominence some time between the IE expansion and first testimony (roman). That would mean that european natural religion had a deus ex machina moment and Odin came out of nowhere in contrast to the entire cross civilizational IE pantheon. In the context of all those european mythologies, Odin is a pretty clear rotation into prominence. And Odin is the ‘odd man out’ in european religion. Of the european iranic and indo-iranic branches, each group evolved deities to fulfill the needs of a survival narrative given geographic and cultural competition. Europeans gods are are interesting because conquering (and replacing) early neolithic farmers was easier than the more advanced civilizations of the indus and mesopotamian regions. They were under less adaptive pressure. Yet still we have Odin. Why? That’s the interesting question. How did he rotate into prominence and why? So to say Odin is the primary germanic god – well of course he is by the thirteenth century record. That doesn’t tell us anything interesting. It doesn’t provide explanatory power. It doesn’t tell us why and where he came from. What change or pressure or advantage caused the germanic branch of the european expansion to rotate a psychopomp into the primary god (all father) to replace sky father? What drove the germanic adaptation (rotation) of a psychopomp into the god of the aristocracy?