Curt Doolittle

Theme: Deception

  • That the ‘aristocracy’ tolerated the invasion of our polity by false promise of

    That the ‘aristocracy’ tolerated the invasion of our polity by false promise of freedom from physical, natural, an evolutionary laws by the marxists, neo-marxists, postmodernists, feminists, and human difference denialists rather than prosecuting them was a catastrophic error.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-23 12:29:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264171692244504577

    Reply addressees: @hugo909 @TheRealFMCH @Maroeladalx10DB @laurenboebert @austere1717

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264171021160112128

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @hugo909 @TheRealFMCH @Maroeladalx10DB @laurenboebert @austere1717 That we don’t prosecute men and women for their actions is a choice. That we extend childhood and create the risks for them is an other fact – and is also a choice – without empirical evidence to support the utility or necessity.

    That we thought the 20th ended scarcity is cause.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1264171021160112128

  • Unfortunately it’s a means of social construction of falsehoods by use of virtue

    Unfortunately it’s a means of social construction of falsehoods by use of virtue signal spirals. In other words it’s how christianity, judaism, islam were spread and how marxism, neo-marxism, postmodernism, feminism, human difference denialism was spread: The Religions of Deceit. https://twitter.com/DegenRolf/status/1264037336813318146

  • Unfortunately it’s a means of social construction of falsehoods by use of virtue

    Unfortunately it’s a means of social construction of falsehoods by use of virtue signal spirals. In other words it’s how christianity, judaism, islam were spread and how marxism, neo-marxism, postmodernism, feminism, human difference denialism was spread: The Religions of Deceit.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-23 11:34:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264157712260173824

    Reply addressees: @DegenRolf

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1264037336813318146

  • Intention Is Not Required for One to Lie

    Apr 3, 2020, 9:40 AM The difference between testimonial truth and honesty is substantial, but perhaps the most surprising is that that we do not need to intend to lie to lie. We need only speak a lie whether we intend to or not. Most of us are carriers of lies. Because we do not know how to perform due diligence against lying. And worse, because we do not desire to stop using our most precious lies. So in P-law, we are guilty of a failure of due diligence against lying, rather than just intent to lie – just as in our existing law we are responsible for restitution whether we intended harm or not. And we are additionally subject to punishment and prevention if we harm by intent.

  • Intention Is Not Required for One to Lie

    Apr 3, 2020, 9:40 AM The difference between testimonial truth and honesty is substantial, but perhaps the most surprising is that that we do not need to intend to lie to lie. We need only speak a lie whether we intend to or not. Most of us are carriers of lies. Because we do not know how to perform due diligence against lying. And worse, because we do not desire to stop using our most precious lies. So in P-law, we are guilty of a failure of due diligence against lying, rather than just intent to lie – just as in our existing law we are responsible for restitution whether we intended harm or not. And we are additionally subject to punishment and prevention if we harm by intent.

  • Being Wrong Versus Lying

    Apr 3, 2020, 11:33 AM

    —“I’m not sure making being wrong and lying the same is going to work. Intent is an incredibly powerful part of our system. It’s the only substantial difference between murder and justifiable homicide. Judging just action/outcome without judging the intent isn’t going to create a workable system”—Greg Hamilton

    That can’t be true, because our legal system already does it. It always has. All this does is extend it from commercial to political speech. Think of it this way: philosophy was invented as a competition to the law to give permission to lie.

    —“Well I’m missing something because it appears you are saying being wrong is lying. … That without intent to deceive to are as guilty as if you had intent. “—Greg Hamilton

    Being wrong, or failing due diligence? You can perform due diligence and still be wrong without fault. You cannot avoid due diligence and still be wrong without fault. This is why the law distinguishes between Restitution, escalating to Punishment, and escalating to Prevention. Means motive and opportunity. We cannot know intent. We can however know due diligence. Which is how we test your truth or lie in law.

  • Being Wrong Versus Lying

    Apr 3, 2020, 11:33 AM

    —“I’m not sure making being wrong and lying the same is going to work. Intent is an incredibly powerful part of our system. It’s the only substantial difference between murder and justifiable homicide. Judging just action/outcome without judging the intent isn’t going to create a workable system”—Greg Hamilton

    That can’t be true, because our legal system already does it. It always has. All this does is extend it from commercial to political speech. Think of it this way: philosophy was invented as a competition to the law to give permission to lie.

    —“Well I’m missing something because it appears you are saying being wrong is lying. … That without intent to deceive to are as guilty as if you had intent. “—Greg Hamilton

    Being wrong, or failing due diligence? You can perform due diligence and still be wrong without fault. You cannot avoid due diligence and still be wrong without fault. This is why the law distinguishes between Restitution, escalating to Punishment, and escalating to Prevention. Means motive and opportunity. We cannot know intent. We can however know due diligence. Which is how we test your truth or lie in law.

  • Graham Hancock

    Apr 10, 2020, 3:23 PM

    —“Curt, What do you think of Graham Hancock?”—

    If I’m sympathetic: I think he is honest about what he does. He makes up, or promotes, myths to inspire and entertain people – to restore wonder to their lives. yes some of what he harps about has a grain of truth in it. I’m charitable because it’s good for us to look back into the past with wonder, the same way we teach children fairy tales so that they will eventually mature into reading history. If I’m charitable, the world needs a few of these people so that we make sure wacky stuff doesn’t get overlooked, and the wrong story entrenched (geology in the past and mathematical physics in the present are the best examples). If I’m doing my job: he’s using pseudoarchaeology (pseudoscience) to get attention, and it’s been a profitable career for him. and given that his stuff is pretty hard to believe I suspect he’s helping us find suckers, catch them, and reeducate them before they do something harmful to themselves or others. Of all the kind of sucker-magnets in the world he’s the least harmful. If I want to correct him, and the audience, it is all but certain that Doggerland, isn’t alone, and the black sea the persian gulf, the red sea, the mediterranean, and the lost lakes and marshes of the south of africa, and various other coastal areas, now obscure much of our long, early, glacial and pre-glacial development with flooding. We may be living in a period of extraordinary technology, but the first five thousand years of chasing the glaciers back north, in doggerland, on the shorts of the black sea has to be about as close to paradise as hunter-gatherers can discover. That said, there is no evidence whatsoever of anything pre-glacial but animals, and nothing obscured by post glacial flooding that gave hints to what is necessary for the evolution of man: fire, metal, and pottery. Yes, people do lose technology (austronesians). Yes people do mature into depth rather than neoteny (equatorial africans). But in general, the long graudal line of history up until the 80-40k, and 40k-10k, and 10k incremental explosions, and the past 400 years of european explosion of knowledge, is so regular in retrospect it looks ordinary.

  • Graham Hancock

    Apr 10, 2020, 3:23 PM

    —“Curt, What do you think of Graham Hancock?”—

    If I’m sympathetic: I think he is honest about what he does. He makes up, or promotes, myths to inspire and entertain people – to restore wonder to their lives. yes some of what he harps about has a grain of truth in it. I’m charitable because it’s good for us to look back into the past with wonder, the same way we teach children fairy tales so that they will eventually mature into reading history. If I’m charitable, the world needs a few of these people so that we make sure wacky stuff doesn’t get overlooked, and the wrong story entrenched (geology in the past and mathematical physics in the present are the best examples). If I’m doing my job: he’s using pseudoarchaeology (pseudoscience) to get attention, and it’s been a profitable career for him. and given that his stuff is pretty hard to believe I suspect he’s helping us find suckers, catch them, and reeducate them before they do something harmful to themselves or others. Of all the kind of sucker-magnets in the world he’s the least harmful. If I want to correct him, and the audience, it is all but certain that Doggerland, isn’t alone, and the black sea the persian gulf, the red sea, the mediterranean, and the lost lakes and marshes of the south of africa, and various other coastal areas, now obscure much of our long, early, glacial and pre-glacial development with flooding. We may be living in a period of extraordinary technology, but the first five thousand years of chasing the glaciers back north, in doggerland, on the shorts of the black sea has to be about as close to paradise as hunter-gatherers can discover. That said, there is no evidence whatsoever of anything pre-glacial but animals, and nothing obscured by post glacial flooding that gave hints to what is necessary for the evolution of man: fire, metal, and pottery. Yes, people do lose technology (austronesians). Yes people do mature into depth rather than neoteny (equatorial africans). But in general, the long graudal line of history up until the 80-40k, and 40k-10k, and 10k incremental explosions, and the past 400 years of european explosion of knowledge, is so regular in retrospect it looks ordinary.

  • Conspiracy

    Conspiracy of Common Interests vs Of Intent —“Maybe I’m unclear on what you mean by intent. It seems to me incentives and intent are interlinked.”—Scott Strong CONSPIRACY OF COMMON INTERESTS: Passively follow incentives to seize existing opportunity – and fail to not seize opportunity that is immoral. CONSPIRACY OF INTENT: Actively work to create opportunities to seize because they are immoral. CONSPIRACY OF IDIOCY: Actively work to crate opportunities to seize that are immoral because you falsely believe that they are moral (you justify them) CONSPIRACY TO BAIT INTO HAZARD: Actively work to create opportunities for others to seize that produce immoral consequences.