Theme: Decidability

  • I Wouldn’t Know how To ‘Test’ Secret Society Membership.

    Oct 26, 2019, 12:08 PM

    —“Does the P constitution support citizen legislatures by prohibiting lawyers, foreign nationals, and secret society membership? The original #13A”—Kurt King @KurtKurtking

    Caution: P-Law only tests for reciprocity. P-law can be used to write any constitution whatever, for any polity, as long as it’s transparent. But, if you mean our proposed US constitution, its Prohibitions are: Lawyers, Govt., Immigrants under six generations, and Foreign Nationals; restores houses for the classes and genders; and requires demonstrated achievement in military, family, biz. I wouldn’t know how to ‘test’ secret society membership. I think all of it’s pretty much conspiracy theory – I mean religions? I would say instead that all organizations pursuing irreciprocity are by definition criminal, and criminals cannot sit The Jury of any House. There is very little reason for a federal legislature under P-law because we revert to european tradition wherein the Houses Juries but not majoritarian bodies. This means that anyone can propose a contract of the commons that does not violate the law, and then the houses (juries) vote whether to deny it. The selection of jurors of the houses is random, and so it’s impossible to use special interests to achieve your ends. Instead all contracts of the commons are subject to transparent public debate under which all statements thereof must be truthful and reciprocal and not in violation of the Law of reciprocity, or the constitution. This de-politicizes the country, and reduces people to either reading ‘proposals’ themselves, or using public intellectuals who are also limited to truthful reciprocal speech, to debate for and against different groups interests. ANy attempt to conspire between these intellectuals to deceive the public is also prosecutable. That means far better more talented smarter people will lead the public intellectual discourse. And even so, ‘parasites’ (liberals) will be prohibited from federal discourse if not all discourse. My preference is a return to monarchy, so that the process of forwarding ideas to the jury for decision is pre-filtered by the Cabinet, or the Cabinet is overridden by request of the people from the jury. However, that said, the federal government is devolved back to the original constitution as a provisioner of insurance of last resort limited to military, judicial, treasury, and insurance functions, and prohibited from interference in norms within the ‘states’. In other words he constitution restores the historical relationship between the catholic church as a juridical body between the states, and thes state as a local body, except using rule of law by P-law of reciprocity.

  • I Wouldn’t Know how To ‘Test’ Secret Society Membership.

    Oct 26, 2019, 12:08 PM

    —“Does the P constitution support citizen legislatures by prohibiting lawyers, foreign nationals, and secret society membership? The original #13A”—Kurt King @KurtKurtking

    Caution: P-Law only tests for reciprocity. P-law can be used to write any constitution whatever, for any polity, as long as it’s transparent. But, if you mean our proposed US constitution, its Prohibitions are: Lawyers, Govt., Immigrants under six generations, and Foreign Nationals; restores houses for the classes and genders; and requires demonstrated achievement in military, family, biz. I wouldn’t know how to ‘test’ secret society membership. I think all of it’s pretty much conspiracy theory – I mean religions? I would say instead that all organizations pursuing irreciprocity are by definition criminal, and criminals cannot sit The Jury of any House. There is very little reason for a federal legislature under P-law because we revert to european tradition wherein the Houses Juries but not majoritarian bodies. This means that anyone can propose a contract of the commons that does not violate the law, and then the houses (juries) vote whether to deny it. The selection of jurors of the houses is random, and so it’s impossible to use special interests to achieve your ends. Instead all contracts of the commons are subject to transparent public debate under which all statements thereof must be truthful and reciprocal and not in violation of the Law of reciprocity, or the constitution. This de-politicizes the country, and reduces people to either reading ‘proposals’ themselves, or using public intellectuals who are also limited to truthful reciprocal speech, to debate for and against different groups interests. ANy attempt to conspire between these intellectuals to deceive the public is also prosecutable. That means far better more talented smarter people will lead the public intellectual discourse. And even so, ‘parasites’ (liberals) will be prohibited from federal discourse if not all discourse. My preference is a return to monarchy, so that the process of forwarding ideas to the jury for decision is pre-filtered by the Cabinet, or the Cabinet is overridden by request of the people from the jury. However, that said, the federal government is devolved back to the original constitution as a provisioner of insurance of last resort limited to military, judicial, treasury, and insurance functions, and prohibited from interference in norms within the ‘states’. In other words he constitution restores the historical relationship between the catholic church as a juridical body between the states, and thes state as a local body, except using rule of law by P-law of reciprocity.

  • Trust, Cooperation (reciprocity), and Decidability of Limits Are Vectors that De

    Trust, Cooperation (reciprocity), and Decidability of Limits Are Vectors that Develop a Civilization’s Long Term Success https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/01/trust-cooperation-reciprocity-and-decidability-of-limits-are-vectors-that-develop-a-civilizations-long-term-success/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-01 13:32:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267449054952394752

  • Trust, Cooperation (reciprocity), and Decidability of Limits Are Vectors that De

    Trust, Cooperation (reciprocity), and Decidability of Limits Are Vectors that Develop a Civilization’s Long Term Success https://t.co/RZTu6YCWlc

  • Trust, Cooperation (reciprocity), and Decidability of Limits Are Vectors that Develop a Civilization’s Long Term Success

    TRUST, COOPERATION (RECIPROCITY), AND DECIDABILITY OF LIMITS ARE VECTORS THAT DEVELOP A CIVILIZATION’S LONG TERM SUCCESS by Lucas Cort (Flawless – CD) The idea that everyone is equal appears to be a good rule for cooperation (when people share similarities) but it neglects full accounting in terms of differences in specialization, incentives,actions, and abilities. Individual: Morphology, cognition, incentives, preferences, morals, culture Genders: Morphology (bodies: bone structure and density, reproductive organs, endocrinology, brain structure distributions), reproductive strategies (incentives, preferences, morals, temperament) Races: Morphology (bodies: bone structure and density, reproductive organs, brain structure distributions), neoteny (rates and duration of sexual maturity), distributions of reproductive strategies, (incentives, preferences, morals, temperament) and group evolutionary strategies (cultural, organization and applications of violence) Classes: Rates of production, consumption, distributions of proceeding categories: (individual,genders,races) If we don’t address differences, we distort the measures that lead to decidability through full accounting and disambiguation. Differences in all these categories can be seen as specializations in the acquisition of genetic, social-cultural, and economic capital. They affect the way we act in the environment with others due to differing incentives. The result of demonstrated property (property-en-toto) shows that people invest and are willing to defend against the impositions of costs. Differing incentives, cognitive biases, reproductive and group evolutionary strategies show that people value property differently. Understanding that differences between the golden rule and the silver rule: Golden rule – “Do unto others as you would have done unto you” Silver rule – “Do not unto others as you would not have done unto you.” And

    Tolerance and forbearance:

    Tolerance – “I use Tolerance to mean allowing costs to be assessed against non-consenting parties as ambiguity makes it unclear what additional party is specifically responsible for costs” – Luke Weinhagen Forbearance – “Forbearance includes tolerance AND limits (until the cost one was willing carried has been exceeded), AND active participation – its a choice which one can boycott/defect based on the cost carried.” – Bill Joslin Clarifies limits, and aids in decidability to in and out group disputes. By disambiguating differences we can address the constant relations across and between these groups, and their interactions allows us to accurately measure transfers between them. Measuring violations of reciprocity under rule of law makes us equal before the law. We are not all equal, but if we insure each other against parasitism, we can preserve cooperation. That way, we don’t shift costs, and we identify group conflict so that we can focus on real solutions to incentivize cooperation. (CD: I can’t tell I didn’t write it myself. It’s flawless. it’s very difficult to get to this level of competency. color me impressed. thank you Lucas. )

  • Trust, Cooperation (reciprocity), and Decidability of Limits Are Vectors that Develop a Civilization’s Long Term Success

    TRUST, COOPERATION (RECIPROCITY), AND DECIDABILITY OF LIMITS ARE VECTORS THAT DEVELOP A CIVILIZATION’S LONG TERM SUCCESS by Lucas Cort (Flawless – CD) The idea that everyone is equal appears to be a good rule for cooperation (when people share similarities) but it neglects full accounting in terms of differences in specialization, incentives,actions, and abilities. Individual: Morphology, cognition, incentives, preferences, morals, culture Genders: Morphology (bodies: bone structure and density, reproductive organs, endocrinology, brain structure distributions), reproductive strategies (incentives, preferences, morals, temperament) Races: Morphology (bodies: bone structure and density, reproductive organs, brain structure distributions), neoteny (rates and duration of sexual maturity), distributions of reproductive strategies, (incentives, preferences, morals, temperament) and group evolutionary strategies (cultural, organization and applications of violence) Classes: Rates of production, consumption, distributions of proceeding categories: (individual,genders,races) If we don’t address differences, we distort the measures that lead to decidability through full accounting and disambiguation. Differences in all these categories can be seen as specializations in the acquisition of genetic, social-cultural, and economic capital. They affect the way we act in the environment with others due to differing incentives. The result of demonstrated property (property-en-toto) shows that people invest and are willing to defend against the impositions of costs. Differing incentives, cognitive biases, reproductive and group evolutionary strategies show that people value property differently. Understanding that differences between the golden rule and the silver rule: Golden rule – “Do unto others as you would have done unto you” Silver rule – “Do not unto others as you would not have done unto you.” And

    Tolerance and forbearance:

    Tolerance – “I use Tolerance to mean allowing costs to be assessed against non-consenting parties as ambiguity makes it unclear what additional party is specifically responsible for costs” – Luke Weinhagen Forbearance – “Forbearance includes tolerance AND limits (until the cost one was willing carried has been exceeded), AND active participation – its a choice which one can boycott/defect based on the cost carried.” – Bill Joslin Clarifies limits, and aids in decidability to in and out group disputes. By disambiguating differences we can address the constant relations across and between these groups, and their interactions allows us to accurately measure transfers between them. Measuring violations of reciprocity under rule of law makes us equal before the law. We are not all equal, but if we insure each other against parasitism, we can preserve cooperation. That way, we don’t shift costs, and we identify group conflict so that we can focus on real solutions to incentivize cooperation. (CD: I can’t tell I didn’t write it myself. It’s flawless. it’s very difficult to get to this level of competency. color me impressed. thank you Lucas. )

  • Disambiguation of ‘rational’

    Disambiguation of ‘rational’ https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/01/disambiguation-of-rational-2/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-01 12:14:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1267429364334985218

  • Disambiguation of ‘rational’

    Disambiguation of ‘rational’ https://t.co/pRNaglQ6Ym

  • Testimony consists of…

    Nov 13, 2019, 10:27 AM Testimony (Propertarianism) consists of … the use of procedural falsification; … in all dimensions of human perception; … resulting in the completion of the Scientific Method ; … its application to the totality of human knowledge; … resulting in a universally commensurable language of all thought; … its embodiment in the common law of tort; … its use in the construction of a template for constitutions; … and as a consequence creating a market for the prosecution of; … … superstition, pseudoscience, sophism, fraud, and deceit … and the eradication of: … … … superstition, pseudoscience, sophism, fraud, and deceit … from the commercial, financial, economic, political, and informational commons; … reversing the second Semitic attempt at the destruction of Western Civilization as it has destroyed every other by systematic undermining from within; … and restoring the quality of life we have expected from Western Civilization; … for those that live today, and those that will yet live in the future;”

  • Testimony consists of…

    Nov 13, 2019, 10:27 AM Testimony (Propertarianism) consists of … the use of procedural falsification; … in all dimensions of human perception; … resulting in the completion of the Scientific Method ; … its application to the totality of human knowledge; … resulting in a universally commensurable language of all thought; … its embodiment in the common law of tort; … its use in the construction of a template for constitutions; … and as a consequence creating a market for the prosecution of; … … superstition, pseudoscience, sophism, fraud, and deceit … and the eradication of: … … … superstition, pseudoscience, sophism, fraud, and deceit … from the commercial, financial, economic, political, and informational commons; … reversing the second Semitic attempt at the destruction of Western Civilization as it has destroyed every other by systematic undermining from within; … and restoring the quality of life we have expected from Western Civilization; … for those that live today, and those that will yet live in the future;”