Curt Doolittle

Theme: Demonstrated Interests

  • WHAT IS P-LAW (Or P-Logic, P-Method or P for short)? Sequence: – Demonstrated In

    WHAT IS P-LAW
    (Or P-Logic, P-Method or P for short)?

    Sequence:
    – Demonstrated Interest (cost born to acquire, preserve, defend, consume, some control of some form of capital (something useful))
    – Property (universal commensurability of demonstrated interest: basically a shorthand people understand because of the long history of law.)
    – Propertarian (one who uses property as a system of weights and meaures providing universal commensurability of human cooperation conflict)
    – Propertarianism (formal logic of cooperation using universal commensurability)
    – Propertarian Natural Law (Universally commensurable natural law of decidability, applied to cooperation, ethics, morality, politics, economics)
    – PvsNP (logical question of whether justification vs falsification is possible in time) (nerd stuff. Ignore it)
    – P-Law, P-Logic, P-Method (Shorthand for the method, the logic that results and the law that results from the logic.)
    – P for short (very-shorthand for the whole system)

    See?

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-12 15:55:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634946284330139649

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634942167453151232

  • LEGAL PROBLEM: define ‘disorder’ or ‘illness.’ 🙂 Unless it’s a demonstrated rat

    LEGAL PROBLEM: define ‘disorder’ or ‘illness.’ 🙂
    Unless it’s a demonstrated rather than predicted risk, its meaningless. That said, ‘crazy’ is easily identifiable by demonstrated behavior.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-09 23:12:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633969135490048002

    Reply addressees: @Timcast

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633822770495643648

  • Great question. But with or without prices we can observe what people seek to ac

    Great question. But with or without prices we can observe what people seek to acquire, inventory, use, trade, and consume.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-08 09:46:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633403897627672576

    Reply addressees: @BasedLawyer

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633402233596309506

  • Evidence: Social Status (Indirect) vs Advertising: Interpersonal Status (Direct)

    Evidence: Social Status (Indirect)
    vs
    Advertising: Interpersonal Status (Direct).

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-07 00:07:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632895620875796481

    Reply addressees: @Max_Stoic

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632801482083901441

  • We are europeans. There is no agreement that can supercede the natural law of se

    We are europeans. There is no agreement that can supercede the natural law of self determination by self determined means, by tests of sovereignty in demonstrated interest, and reciprocity in display word and deed. This is the origin of natural rights and human rights. It is not man’s law. It is a law of nature, and if there is one, nature’s god. Yet, violating this one rule is what all empires depend upon for survival: depriving others of the right to self determination by self determined means.

    There never has been a postwar threat to RU security. Instead, RU has been a threat to it’s neighbors. And no governmnet has a right to conquer and rule another and remove it’s right to self determination. And while we have little interest outside of europe, other than maintaining the energy markets, aggression against Ukraine was the last straw.

    There shall be no ‘next’ Russian empire. And Russian security like the security of all sovereign people must be obtained by alliance in reciprocal defense of borders. Russia is too untrustworhty at home and abroad for that agreement until it has a change of government. Yes, we should have worked to integrate RU into NATO but this is as much RU’s fault as the West’s. There will be no RU in the future without integration with the west. If not, then CN will take asia, RU population will continue to contract, and it will be limited to west of the urals again, and surrounded by enemies of three different civilizations on three different sides.

    I don’t make a lot of errors. And this isn’t one of them.

    Reply addressees: @BernieRakocevic @Lavrovskyi

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-05 02:15:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632203174428721155

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632198872197103616

  • We are europeans. There is no agreement that can supercede the natural law of se

    We are europeans. There is no agreement that can supercede the natural law of self determination by self determined means, by tests of sovereignty in demonstrated interest, and reciprocity in display word and deed. This is the origin of natural rights and human rights. It is not man’s law. It is a law of nature, and if there is one, nature’s god. Yet, violating this one rule is what all empires depend upon for survival: depriving others of the right to self determination by self determined means.

    There never has been a postwar threat to RU security. Instead, RU has been a threat to it’s neighbors. And no governmnet has a right to conquer and rule another and remove it’s right to self determination. And while we have little interest outside of europe, other than maintaining the energy markets, aggression against Ukraine was the last straw.

    There shall be no ‘next’ Russian empire. And Russian security like the security of all sovereign people must be obtained by alliance in reciprocal defense of borders. Russia is too untrustworhty at home and abroad for that agreement until it has a change of government. Yes, we should have worked to integrate RU into NATO but this is as much RU’s fault as the West’s. There will be no RU in the future without integration with the west. If not, then CN will take asia, RU population will continue to contract, and it will be limited to west of the urals again, and surrounded by enemies of three different civilizations on three different sides.

    I don’t make a lot of errors. And this isn’t one of them.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-05 02:15:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632203174579691528

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1632198872197103616

  • Well of course. Though as usual, the short answer is of course, and the long ans

    Well of course.
    Though as usual, the short answer is of course, and the long answer is, but there are other groups who have different interests, so what about them? And I want to produce the science for everyone.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-02 22:55:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631428103032516608

    Reply addressees: @TheAutistocrat @blamblamtheman

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631424741457182722

  • THE ONLINE WAR OF ‘CULTS’? Almost everything I read on Twitter consists of virtu

    THE ONLINE WAR OF ‘CULTS’?
    Almost everything I read on Twitter consists of virtue signaling unearned undemonstrated virtue, for moral pretenses that are utilitarian, selfish, ideological – and certainly not moral, seeking affiliation in ‘teams’ (cults) – using assertions, claims, beliefs, imaginings, fictions, lies, frauds, composed of ignorance, error, bias, and deceit. When all humans are very simple: we seek discounts on what we want without earning it, or engaging in reciprocal exchange for it – and given our differences in ability, personality, want, even when educated, we sort into factions (cults) seeking to obtain or defend one thing more than any other: status and self image. When modernity, and mass communication demonstrate every day, that most of us, nearly all of us, differ only in how little harm we do – not how much good we produce for self, family, community and polity. We are ignorant, selfish, petty, status seeking, hyperconsuming, spoiled children. And this causes us to want more rather than to focus on our enemy – who is largely in the talking classes, and largely generates this cultism, in the government, financial sector, academy, media, and activist sectors.
    -FIN-

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-23 16:02:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1628787453854158848

  • ANSWER –“how much can you trust a feeling?”– 1) All emotions are reactions to

    ANSWER
    –“how much can you trust a feeling?”–

    1) All emotions are reactions to change in state of ‘something of value to you’ (an asset, a demonstrated interest) whether potential gain, gain, retention, loss, potential loss. And whether the form of our body, action, time, habit, knowledge, relationship, thing, association, organization, commons … anything we have an interest in. (interest in the legal sense, not in the mental sense.)

    2) We may correctly or incorrectly interpret the legitimacy of our interest in (right to) what it is that we value whose state is, or may change.

    3) We may correctly or incorrectly morally and ethically interpret the legitimacy of ours or others’ interest in (right to) what is changing.

    4) In the sense that you ask the question, ‘Can we trust our emotions?’ we can trust that they are caused by something or other that we believe has changed state (most often our status or self-image than anything else, since status and self-image largely determine access to opportunities), we cannot trust whether these emotions are ‘true, useful, ethical, moral’ practical, or selfish, petty, childish, immature, antisocial, criminal, or evil.

    5) We are different from chimps (and they are not good, kind, or nice or virtuous creatures by any means) largely because we have developed sufficient agency (self-reflection and impulse suppression) so that we don’t retaliate against anything but that we must retaliate against given our environment.

    -Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-19 06:58:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627200873561563138

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627158909885747206

  • Interesting. The USA was majority ethic german. But while we had periods of angl

    Interesting. The USA was majority ethic german. But while we had periods of anglo and dutch ethnic dominance by demonstrated competency, and the postwar use of credentialism for jewish capture of institutions, we never had german capture of institutions other than fundamentalism.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-10 17:13:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1624094337893117966