—“Libertarians both demand the creation of a highly virtuous population as a prelude to their preferred government and strenuously oppose any measure to actually create that virtuous population.”—Waylon Hill
that is because rothbard did not bring ethics of sovereignty to the table but license for parasitism
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-24 09:32:00 UTC
so far I have only seen one guy who could write an ‘idiots guide’ to propertarianism. he’s young. he’s not got enough confidence. we need to somehow get him to do it.
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-22 08:47:00 UTC
DEAR LURKERS AND NEWBS I’m really generous with my time. I don’t even care how stupid the question is as long as it’s framed as an honest question. If I don’t answer it one of the other guys will. But you shouldn’t be afraid of asking. Every time we answer a question, we get better at answering questions. And everyone else who is lurking will learn because of your honesty and ‘bravery’. lol
DEAR LURKERS AND NEWBS I’m really generous with my time. I don’t even care how stupid the question is as long as it’s framed as an honest question. If I don’t answer it one of the other guys will. But you shouldn’t be afraid of asking. Every time we answer a question, we get better at answering questions. And everyone else who is lurking will learn because of your honesty and ‘bravery’. lol
–“Hi, Curt! Reading your latest piece on Facebook starting as “DEAR MISEDUCATED WORLD”. Interesting piece. I wanted to learn math on my own to accompany my job in life sciences, but was always taken away from the simplistic nature of perspective. I wonder, how do you approach learning logic, the ternary “science” as you suggest? I know you are right, at least on an intuitive level, but I would like to know more.”—- A Friend. I came to my current understanding primarily because in my work, I’ve studied arguments in literally every field. BUT I have spent most of my time in computer science, which sits as bridge between engineering and mathematics. And so if you think in science, in engineering, in computer science, in mathematics, in logic, and in philosophy, and in law, you just come into contact with all these terms that everyone uses in each discipline that when studied whole simply refer to very different conditions. And by trying to resolve the conflicts between these disciplines you sort of get the insight into what ‘was wrong’.
–“Hi, Curt! Reading your latest piece on Facebook starting as “DEAR MISEDUCATED WORLD”. Interesting piece. I wanted to learn math on my own to accompany my job in life sciences, but was always taken away from the simplistic nature of perspective. I wonder, how do you approach learning logic, the ternary “science” as you suggest? I know you are right, at least on an intuitive level, but I would like to know more.”—- A Friend. I came to my current understanding primarily because in my work, I’ve studied arguments in literally every field. BUT I have spent most of my time in computer science, which sits as bridge between engineering and mathematics. And so if you think in science, in engineering, in computer science, in mathematics, in logic, and in philosophy, and in law, you just come into contact with all these terms that everyone uses in each discipline that when studied whole simply refer to very different conditions. And by trying to resolve the conflicts between these disciplines you sort of get the insight into what ‘was wrong’.
—” If I were a total newb what book/books should I start with?”—Ziggy Propertarianism (Natural Law) is a painfully precise language for the amoral comparison between the various categories, values, methods of ‘knowing’, methods of communicating, and means of decidability social orders, as well as making inferior superior, moral and immoral, and true and false decisions within and across them. While the grammar of Natural Law is demanding, and the number of principles you need to understand not much more difficult than say, geometry, it is much easier to learn Natural Law (Propertarianism) if you understand the context that we’re coming from. So, if you asked me how to learn any subject I would tell you to start with an historical novel, or movie about it to provide cultural context. Then I would suggest an autobiography about it to provide personal context. Then I would tell you to read an introduction to the technical aspects – something short. Then to read a textbook about it. So I would tell you to work from broad brush strokes to very precise formula by incremental means. You do not need to know the history of warfare, of the common law, of the differences in truth content between argumentative and communicative structures, or the depths of epistemology. You need to know a little about mankind, and then a very little about western civlization’s “luck of the draw”: Sovereignty is possible under certain geographic conditions: when no resource can be centralized and exploited for the purpose of concentrating the proceeds of production in a minor class, and where a self- funded militia is necessary for the defense of territory. So to get you started, I’ll leave you with that one idea, and these four books. After that see the Reading List at the top of the website for more. And honestly, the best way to learn is to follow me. I basically teach class every day, in a vast one-room schoolhouse with students of all grades: Facebook on the internet. THE INDIVIDUAL Jonathan Haidt: The Righteous Mind THE COMMUNITY Francis Fukuyama: Trust
—” If I were a total newb what book/books should I start with?”—Ziggy Propertarianism (Natural Law) is a painfully precise language for the amoral comparison between the various categories, values, methods of ‘knowing’, methods of communicating, and means of decidability social orders, as well as making inferior superior, moral and immoral, and true and false decisions within and across them. While the grammar of Natural Law is demanding, and the number of principles you need to understand not much more difficult than say, geometry, it is much easier to learn Natural Law (Propertarianism) if you understand the context that we’re coming from. So, if you asked me how to learn any subject I would tell you to start with an historical novel, or movie about it to provide cultural context. Then I would suggest an autobiography about it to provide personal context. Then I would tell you to read an introduction to the technical aspects – something short. Then to read a textbook about it. So I would tell you to work from broad brush strokes to very precise formula by incremental means. You do not need to know the history of warfare, of the common law, of the differences in truth content between argumentative and communicative structures, or the depths of epistemology. You need to know a little about mankind, and then a very little about western civlization’s “luck of the draw”: Sovereignty is possible under certain geographic conditions: when no resource can be centralized and exploited for the purpose of concentrating the proceeds of production in a minor class, and where a self- funded militia is necessary for the defense of territory. So to get you started, I’ll leave you with that one idea, and these four books. After that see the Reading List at the top of the website for more. And honestly, the best way to learn is to follow me. I basically teach class every day, in a vast one-room schoolhouse with students of all grades: Facebook on the internet. THE INDIVIDUAL Jonathan Haidt: The Righteous Mind THE COMMUNITY Francis Fukuyama: Trust
( My sister teaches kindergarten. My mother taught middle school. I sort of teach at the other end of the spectrum. Whats the difference? Mostly choice. The little ones can’t choose, the middle ones prefer to choose not to, and the adults choose to. )
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 16:27:00 UTC
TESTIMONIAL: THIS IS MY TARGET AUDIENCE, EVEN IF I’D LIKE MORE REACH
FROM BL Wilson
—“I’m a MENSA member (top 2%, generally seen as minimum 138 IQ), and your writings challenge me more then anything else I’ve tried to comprehend and I have a doctorate of pharmacology degree.
I think I’m just too lazy to USE a large, expanded vocabulary, but I do understand almost all of what you post. I also appreciate how much you interact with your followers and fans.
Anyhow, love your stuff. Never heard of propertarianism until you and Eli Harman. Always wanting to learn more.”—- BL Wilson
YOU SHOULD MAKE SURE YOU FOLLOW ELI
Eli is much, much better than I am at teaching propertarianism and I probably (out of not wanting to impose upon the man I consider my partner) don’t push more people to him first.
It actually bothers me that I don’t have more reach, but so many people volunteer to increase that reach that it isn’t necessary. So while I don’t take incomprehensibility as a criticism, I still wish I could.
I don’t like to name names or show favoritism mostly because it seems to alter the behavior of my best followers, but the if you read the comments even casually you’ll see who else to follow.
We have people across the spectrum.
We are achieving our goals.
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 14:34:00 UTC