You don’t understand.
Sovereignty is decidable.
The first cause of western civ is this decidability – a feature that no other has.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-13 23:50:00 UTC
You don’t understand.
Sovereignty is decidable.
The first cause of western civ is this decidability – a feature that no other has.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-13 23:50:00 UTC
(a) as ability declines demand for intuitionistic fictions increases, and conversely as ability increases demand for rationally decidable criteria increases. Meaning those of lesser ability require we appeal to intuitions, and those of greater ability require we appeal to reason. This is because those of lower ability have not been sufficiently domesticated (produced agency) by those of greater ability.
(b) literary analogy using archetypes and archetypal story lines (we can list both archetypes and story lines) can be decomposed into rational terms and tested. Literary analogy allows loading and framing so that individuals can learn by intuition rather than reason (ie: by suggestion). But if we cannot decompose these analogies to scientific statements we do not know if they are false, or harmful or ‘evil’ as abrahamism has been.
(d) people require a means of calculating (reasoning, thinking) in the broadest sense, and the most simple units of measure are anthropological. In the absence of tribal feedback they need what we call mindfulness but is better thought of a means of selecting and ignoring impulses (some of us call this agency). and in the absence of tribal community and dependence we need festivals and feasts. And to establish the limits we need an oath. All civilizations address this spectrum of mindfulness to oath, to feast, to festival to compensate for the competition produced by production, and the hierarchy that evolves form that division of knowledge, labor, and advocacy involved in the production of private, commercial, and public goods. This is because too few of us are evolved enough to survive without institutions that provide help to our remaining animal intuitions.
We teach certain skills but what we do not teach is ‘sacredness of the commons’ that churches did, and we do not teach mindfulness or norms in a rational fashion.
Religion is dying everywhere. ANd it is being replaced with things that are almost as bad. The question is how we provide the necessary services of religions in a manner not constituted by lies that do not decompose in to scientifically testable, and therefore indisputable prose.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-10 15:21:00 UTC
Every civilization needs literature, oaths, and festivals for the intergenerational propagation of general rules of decidability that express their group competitive strategy. No civilization needs lies, and Abrahamism in word and form is just lies.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-09 15:21:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/983364268400799744
Reply addressees: @TheAustrian_
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/983363836370739200
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@TheAustrian_ Sorry. I have spent extraordinary effort in testing our most cherished beliefs: and Abrahamism created the dark ages. Jews did nothing. We did very little. And muslims destroyed the four great civilizations of the ancient world – dragging them backward into inescapable ignorance.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/983363836370739200
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@TheAustrian_ Sorry. I have spent extraordinary effort in testing our most cherished beliefs: and Abrahamism created the dark ages. Jews did nothing. We did very little. And muslims destroyed the four great civilizations of the ancient world – dragging them backward into inescapable ignorance.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/983363836370739200
Very few of us are capable of understanding this, because the desire for closure (mathiness) in the pursuit of certainty (justification) is impossible for all but the most confident to tolerate. Taleb says it poorly but “skin in the game” is the only solution to such behaviors.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-09 14:23:28 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/983349680158531585
Reply addressees: @FriedrichHayek @NakedKeynes
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/983348359485419521
IN REPLY TO:
@FriedrichHayek
@NakedKeynes Hayek is right and you are wrong in pointing out that the “invisible hand” is a causal empirical mechanism which explains an empirical problem, and it is not a definition of “value” nor is it a tautological conceptual construction tied any model of “value”. Arrow blundered here.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/983348359485419521
There are many useful means of free association (conflation) but only one means of falsification (deflation). Justificationism is false.
The question is not what is true such that we can make an excuse, so that we can claim justification for preference, but whether we engage in falsehood, deception, reciprocity, and externality. Wisdom lit is full of falsehood, deception, suggestion, obscurantism reciprocity and externality.
So solving for a truth claim in wisdom lit is simply an act of fraud. What you mean is ‘it works to satisfy a need’. Whether or not it ‘s true reciprocal, and free of externality is still open to question regardless of opinion.
The question then is wheher something is preferable yet not false, irreciprocal and plagued with externatlities
That is the only wisdom we need understand.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-04 22:21:00 UTC
We speak in emotions because we have not reduced them to cause. The need we feel always and everywhere is to reduce the effort of decidability. We call this mindfulness in some cases. Religion increases decidability and decreases costs of decisions. That is why it was successful.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-29 00:45:22 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979157534186622976
Reply addressees: @karlbykarlsmith
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979053702446309376
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/979053702446309376
5 – Now, it turns out that just as we can measure things with mathematics, or scales, or volumes, and we can measure the logical consistency of sentences, and we can write programs, we can also learn how to ‘measure’ what people say – such that we can tell if it’s false. …
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-23 00:25:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976978186901868544
Reply addressees: @MaganeUsoNoUso
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976976828438073345
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@MaganeUsoNoUso 4 – We call this process of measurement and testing ‘science’. The problem with that system of measurement and testing is that there are things we can afford, and there are things we cannot afford to measure and test – including our patience, time, and energy.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/976976828438073345
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@MaganeUsoNoUso 4 – We call this process of measurement and testing ‘science’. The problem with that system of measurement and testing is that there are things we can afford, and there are things we cannot afford to measure and test – including our patience, time, and energy.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/976976828438073345
PHILOSOPHY FOR GROWN UPS PART ONE AND PART TWO
1. The only truths we know for certain are falsehoods. Everything that is not false is a truth candidate. This is the inverse of the fallacy of justificationism and the central insight of the sciences: the means by which we invent or grasp an idea contribute nothing to whether or not it is true or false. Only exhaustive falsification and survival from criticism deliver confidence that actions produce anticipated outcomes due to our comprehension of cause, effect, and the operations that are possible. Otherwise we are forever justifying whatever it is we seek to justify by any set of excuses we can imagine. This is why astrology, numerology, theology, philosophy, and the pseudosciences are so common – justification means absolutely nothing.
2. The only preference we know is the one we demonstrate. The only good we know is the one we mutually demonstrate by acting upon. People report very differently from what they demonstrate. The only morality we know that is we must avoid criminal(material), ethical(direct), and moral (indirect) imposition of costs upon one another. The only moral actions then are those that are not criminal, unethical, and immoral, and that means the only moral actions consiste of productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of imposition of costs upon the investments of others by externality. Ergo, all moral actions are those that are not immoral. There is no recipe for moral action other than that which is not immoral.
3. People always and everywhere demonstrate that they are neither moral or immoral but amoral and rational, doing what they must in all circumstances that they exist in. it is just disproportionately advantageous to act morally for the simple reason that the returns of cooperation always and everywhere defeat the returns on individual action. This is why exhaustive forgiveness of ‘cheaters’ in all walks of life will generally reform them. Because it is in their self interest. This is why we demonstrate altruistic punishment also (high cost of punishing cheaters), because the returns on cooperation are so valuable that we evolved to pay the high cost of punishment in order to preserve the high value of cooperation.
4. People notoriously think they are right and in the right, and acting morally, which is why we have courts of one kind or another among all peoples at all stages of development. And while rules of decidability in courts in matters of conflict vary from the poor and underdeveloped where interests in things, kin, and relationships are rare and collectively owned, to the wealthy and developed where things, interests, kin, relationships, and contracts are universally allocated to individuals and individually owned, the means of decidability in every single civilization is RECIPROCITY.
5. There exist then only one negative moral rule and one universal test of morality: “Do not unto others as they would not have done unto them”. There is only one positive moral rule: the extension of trust to non kin that we extend to kin, until it is no longer empirically possible to trust. – this optimizes cooperation by continuously training malcontents that it is in their interest to cooperate, and ostracizes (punishes) those who do not.
6. There are no conflicts that are not decidable by tests of reciprocity. None. This is why all international law is limited exclusively to the test of reciprocity. So logically(rational choice) and empirically (demonstrated action), and universally (all laws domestica and international at all scales) morality is anything that is not immoral unethical or criminal in that it imposes costs upon the efforts already expended to obtain a non-conflicting interest, in a good, relationship, or opportunity.
As far as I know no argument can defeat this that is not in and of itself an attempt at reciprocity (theft, freeriding, parasitism, conspiracy).
PHILOSOPHY FOR GROWNUPS PART TWO
This is not so much a philosophy as the results of science that I can no longer deny, and so I live according to the science – in large part because it is advantageous.
1. We are an expensive life form. Particularly our brains.
2. We must acquire, and we acquire at cost to ourselves. we acquire experiences, things, kin, relations, interests, opportunities.
3. All our emotions are nothing but reflections in state of that which we plan to, are in the process of, or have acquired an interest.
4. Cooperation is logarithmically more productive than any action an individual can take, and therefore we must cooperate to survive -or at least not encourage retaliation against us. (Possibly as much as ten thousand times as productive.)
5. People are purely rational, not moral or immoral but amoral: they cheat and try to acquire disproportionately from cooperation, they free ride, steal from, and prey upon others. This is why we demonstrate altruistic punishment of cheaters in all walks of life, even at high personal cost: to prevent defectors from cheating.
6. The optimum algorithm (really) for developing cooperation is to exhaust every opportunity for cooperation even from cheaters. They almost always come around, because it is always an advantage to come around. This was the entire message of christianity which was lost in the dogma. But it’s just science.
7. All our speech is merely a dance of negotiation so that we may create opportunities to acquire, do acquire, or preserve what we acquire. All of it is just signaling.
8. We are entirely incognizant of these behaviors because it is evolutionarily disadvantageous for us to be intuitively honest, honest with ourselves, and honest with others. This is the same reason we have many cognitive, social, and probabilistic biases in our genes. To keep us going when evidence would overwhelm us.
9. Most of the joy in life is playing this set of word games, cooperative games, and acquisition games with others so that we all acquire what we want as best we can without making others avoid us so that we can’t acquire what we want and need. This is why people commit suicide when they are lonely, and do not commit suicide when they are not.
10. Therefor the only rule of cooperation, of morality, and of law, is reciprocity: productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary cooperation with each other, and the only immoral actions are those that violate that moral rule by free riding, parasitism, theft, or predation. And that is why reciprocity is the basis of all traditional laws (and why it is not the basis of legislation).
This little list is the answer to nearly all of metaphysics, epistemology, psychology, sociology, ethics, and politics.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-20 13:02:00 UTC
Look: Truth, Formal Logic, Formal Language, and Law are Via-Negativas, and are not going to be as popular or as accessible as story, parable, analogy, and essay.Natural Law, Programming, and Math are not accessible.I’m never going to be popular for my formal work.Not my audience.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-19 13:19:09 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/975723349656600576