Curt Doolittle

Theme: Deception

  • The Constitution of Political Conspiracies

    THE CONSTITUTION OF POLITICAL CONSPIRACIES

    —“The purpose of policy is to destroy the family?”— A Twitter Critic

    [I] think you, like most victims of 20th C pseudoscience attribute greater agency to our intentions, and stated intent over external consequence. Conspiracies of common cognitive bias, common interest are endemic even if common intent isn’t – outside of those with such agency. Learn the technique of false promise, baiting into moral hazard, pilpul (via positiva), critique (via negativa), and its common thread in the three monotheistic religions, marxism, pomo, feminism, and political correctness – but insightfully, the female strategy of undermining. To say its a conspiracy of intent would require intentionality of female anti-social expression (psychosis, promiscuity, undermining, reputation destruction). Instead, social super-predation (undermining) is instinctual for most; a political strategy some & deliberate for others. Useful idiots constitute the vast majority of the population (I know, I have iffy followers too.) For whom the portfolio of sentiments need be satisfied, not the central object of stated policy. Humans account for calories(consumption), and status(opportunity) almost exclusively. Just as economic policy consists of pulling a small number of levers to produce externalities by design, social and political policy consists of many more levers which produce direct objective and external objectives. Rarely if ever is the stated policy the central objective. This is why the declaration, constitution, and bill of rights are an adequate attempt to restate norman,anglo-saxon, germanic traditional law as natural law, expressed in specific rights. But lacking strict construction from the foundations of that law, the constitution was weak. The anglo constitutions from which our prosperity originates were written for people of shared moral and ethical intuition, with a shared history of means of dispute resolution,with limited power distance,and limited difference in means of production of family, goods, & services. The industrialization of lying by sophism and pseudoscience, denialism, and deceit using new media in the 19th 20th, and the capture of ‘preaching’ in school, academy, and media by profiting from use of this technique has left the 20th a repeat of the first-second century. Hayek and Poincare were right: the 20th will be remembered as a repeat of christianization and islamization of the ancient world – this time with sophism, pseudoscience and denial,instead of sophism, supernaturalism and denial:false promise of reversing the consequences of genes. I don’t err. It’s my job not to. -Cheers.

  • The Constitution of Political Conspiracies

    THE CONSTITUTION OF POLITICAL CONSPIRACIES

    —“The purpose of policy is to destroy the family?”— A Twitter Critic

    [I] think you, like most victims of 20th C pseudoscience attribute greater agency to our intentions, and stated intent over external consequence. Conspiracies of common cognitive bias, common interest are endemic even if common intent isn’t – outside of those with such agency. Learn the technique of false promise, baiting into moral hazard, pilpul (via positiva), critique (via negativa), and its common thread in the three monotheistic religions, marxism, pomo, feminism, and political correctness – but insightfully, the female strategy of undermining. To say its a conspiracy of intent would require intentionality of female anti-social expression (psychosis, promiscuity, undermining, reputation destruction). Instead, social super-predation (undermining) is instinctual for most; a political strategy some & deliberate for others. Useful idiots constitute the vast majority of the population (I know, I have iffy followers too.) For whom the portfolio of sentiments need be satisfied, not the central object of stated policy. Humans account for calories(consumption), and status(opportunity) almost exclusively. Just as economic policy consists of pulling a small number of levers to produce externalities by design, social and political policy consists of many more levers which produce direct objective and external objectives. Rarely if ever is the stated policy the central objective. This is why the declaration, constitution, and bill of rights are an adequate attempt to restate norman,anglo-saxon, germanic traditional law as natural law, expressed in specific rights. But lacking strict construction from the foundations of that law, the constitution was weak. The anglo constitutions from which our prosperity originates were written for people of shared moral and ethical intuition, with a shared history of means of dispute resolution,with limited power distance,and limited difference in means of production of family, goods, & services. The industrialization of lying by sophism and pseudoscience, denialism, and deceit using new media in the 19th 20th, and the capture of ‘preaching’ in school, academy, and media by profiting from use of this technique has left the 20th a repeat of the first-second century. Hayek and Poincare were right: the 20th will be remembered as a repeat of christianization and islamization of the ancient world – this time with sophism, pseudoscience and denial,instead of sophism, supernaturalism and denial:false promise of reversing the consequences of genes. I don’t err. It’s my job not to. -Cheers.

  • Demand for the Pleasing Delusion

    Demand for the Pleasing Delusion https://propertarianism.com/2019/10/03/demand-for-the-pleasing-delusion/

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-03 21:16:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179867950875938816

  • Demand for the Pleasing Delusion

    by Daniel Gurpide [I ]previously posted that

    –“Plato’s philosophy was for ‘the intellectuals’; the ethics of Plato are tied to his whole system of knowledge, including politics. The doctrines of Epicurus appealed chiefly to the middle classes, the bourgeoisie; the ethics of Epicurus are separated from politics and joined only with physics (and Aristotle). The teachings of Jesus were for the very poor, the lost sheep. The ethics of Jesus are isolated from both physics and politics and fitted into a development scheme of salvation.”—

    [C]urt and I were trying to figure out why Epicurean philosophy was wiped out so easily after the fall of the Roman Empire. There were never strong Epicurean communities. Epicureans prioritized their small groups and chose not to engage in politics (a consequence of the civil wars that used to plague the ancient world). I was recently reading “Liberalism: Ancient & Modern” by Leo Strauss. The central chapter and the longest chapter is his “Notes on Lucretius”. He identifies one of the main tenets of Epicurean teaching–that the world that we love is not eternal, because every world is mortal within the eternal universe of atoms in motion–as “the most terrible truth”. Philosophers can live with this truth with a tranquil mind. But most human beings cannot. And consequently most human beings can find peace of mind only through the “pleasing delusion” of a religious belief that the world of human concern is supported by a loving intelligent designer. I guess that the temptation for the Platonist “intellectuals” to lead the “lost sheep” and at the same time sandwich the middle classes has always been there.

  • Demand for the Pleasing Delusion

    by Daniel Gurpide [I ]previously posted that

    –“Plato’s philosophy was for ‘the intellectuals’; the ethics of Plato are tied to his whole system of knowledge, including politics. The doctrines of Epicurus appealed chiefly to the middle classes, the bourgeoisie; the ethics of Epicurus are separated from politics and joined only with physics (and Aristotle). The teachings of Jesus were for the very poor, the lost sheep. The ethics of Jesus are isolated from both physics and politics and fitted into a development scheme of salvation.”—

    [C]urt and I were trying to figure out why Epicurean philosophy was wiped out so easily after the fall of the Roman Empire. There were never strong Epicurean communities. Epicureans prioritized their small groups and chose not to engage in politics (a consequence of the civil wars that used to plague the ancient world). I was recently reading “Liberalism: Ancient & Modern” by Leo Strauss. The central chapter and the longest chapter is his “Notes on Lucretius”. He identifies one of the main tenets of Epicurean teaching–that the world that we love is not eternal, because every world is mortal within the eternal universe of atoms in motion–as “the most terrible truth”. Philosophers can live with this truth with a tranquil mind. But most human beings cannot. And consequently most human beings can find peace of mind only through the “pleasing delusion” of a religious belief that the world of human concern is supported by a loving intelligent designer. I guess that the temptation for the Platonist “intellectuals” to lead the “lost sheep” and at the same time sandwich the middle classes has always been there.

  • On baiting into moral hazards

    —“Can anyone elaborate on the baiting into moral hazards via pilpul please? Is that to use philosophy and morality as an argument as opposed to utility, reciprocity based on empirical?”—

    0) A woman implies access to friendship, affection, or sex, which she will never deliver. 1) I promise you life after death if you obey and undermine the upper classes. (abrahamism) 2) I promise you power and equality if you undermine the political system (marx) 3) I promise you equality if you undermine men (feminism) 4) I promise you status if you undermine the status hierarchy (postmodernism) 5) I lend you money at usurious prices that will entrap you. 6) I lend you money or extend you credit to gamble. 7) I lend you money or extend you credit to buy alcohol or drugs. 8) I appeal to your morality and pass the hart cellar immigration act. How long do you want this list to go on? Because those are just the easy ones. These are all lies that bait you into hazard (risk and loss).

  • On baiting into moral hazards

    —“Can anyone elaborate on the baiting into moral hazards via pilpul please? Is that to use philosophy and morality as an argument as opposed to utility, reciprocity based on empirical?”—

    0) A woman implies access to friendship, affection, or sex, which she will never deliver. 1) I promise you life after death if you obey and undermine the upper classes. (abrahamism) 2) I promise you power and equality if you undermine the political system (marx) 3) I promise you equality if you undermine men (feminism) 4) I promise you status if you undermine the status hierarchy (postmodernism) 5) I lend you money at usurious prices that will entrap you. 6) I lend you money or extend you credit to gamble. 7) I lend you money or extend you credit to buy alcohol or drugs. 8) I appeal to your morality and pass the hart cellar immigration act. How long do you want this list to go on? Because those are just the easy ones. These are all lies that bait you into hazard (risk and loss).

  • Humans Swim in a Sea of Testimony

    TESTIMONYby Bill Joslin [H]umans swim in a sea of testimony. Any information we gather beyond local and immediate scale has been gained through the testimony of others. Because this is akin to the air we breathe we often overlook the drastic impact that testimony plays in nearly all of our decisions, choices, and actions. If given a truly sincere analysis in this vein, the very foundations of our personal realities may be shaken to a degree that I can only describe as akin to the fear of death. Coupling this realization with the fraud that our memories often play on us (memory just being self-testimony), the importance of operationalism (in thought and deed) and self-authoring based upon operationalism becomes paramount and weighed second only to our instinct to survive (because information remains a critical component to our ability to survive) …which is why testimonialism receives such resistance… it cuts through the denial of our ignorance which we like to cover with a venier of certainty. …oh how deeply we rely upon our trust in others and oh how we like to hide this fact from ourselves…

  • Humans Swim in a Sea of Testimony

    TESTIMONYby Bill Joslin [H]umans swim in a sea of testimony. Any information we gather beyond local and immediate scale has been gained through the testimony of others. Because this is akin to the air we breathe we often overlook the drastic impact that testimony plays in nearly all of our decisions, choices, and actions. If given a truly sincere analysis in this vein, the very foundations of our personal realities may be shaken to a degree that I can only describe as akin to the fear of death. Coupling this realization with the fraud that our memories often play on us (memory just being self-testimony), the importance of operationalism (in thought and deed) and self-authoring based upon operationalism becomes paramount and weighed second only to our instinct to survive (because information remains a critical component to our ability to survive) …which is why testimonialism receives such resistance… it cuts through the denial of our ignorance which we like to cover with a venier of certainty. …oh how deeply we rely upon our trust in others and oh how we like to hide this fact from ourselves…

  • Because of The Technique Used to Sell and Argue the Abrahamic Religions

    —“Can you explain how that paradigm is Abrahamic?”— Sean-Vernon Sutherland

    (Referring to capitalism vs socialism instead of rule of law and arbitrary rule) [U]sing the method of persuasion consisting of false promise, pilpul, and critique (undermining) by which the abrahamic religions of the old world, and the new world: marxism, socialism, feminism, postmodernism, and denialism, with of course, fundamentalist islam persisting. It’s the female method of undermining, rather than western masculine truth and reciprocity. in effect the abrahamic method (undermining) is the primary competitor to european science and chinese reason. It is the art of lying. Study women’s conflict strategy.

    —“I don’t see what that has to do with Abraham.”— Sean-Vernon Sutherland

    Then maybe you don’t need to. Unless you want to learn the different means by which different civilizations conduct their propaganda (mythology) and group strategy then it’s not important for you. Just learn the technique, learn the technique of western truth, and every civilization employs a system of argument (persuasion) somewhere between european truth and abrahamic lying, with chinese closest to european, followed by hindustani, followed by buddhist followed by abrahamic (middle eastern, monotheistic, supernatural sophism, and its modern reformation in pseudoscience, and sophism). If we use the term rabbinical (who invented it) then we exclude christianity, islam, judaism, marxism, freudianism, boasianism, postmodernism, feminism and denialism (political correctness) which are all constructed by the same means. So we use abahamic to encompass both the first generation of abrahamic sophisms (abrahamic religions) and the second generation (marxism, socialism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism, political correctness). This (The Gramamars) is one of the foundational methodologies in propertarianism: 0. Enumeration, Serialization, Disambiguation, and Operationalization1. Testimonial Truth and The Grammars of truth and deceit2. Reciprocity, Demonstrated Interest3. Compatibilism4. Strict construction of law5. Perfect Government There is much more than that but that’s about all people can manage at one time.