Curt Doolittle

Theme: Grammar

  • A Hierarchy of Argumentative Structures

    (useful) (learning propertarianism)

    [T]he next ten arguments you make, try to determine which form of argument the person is relying upon. (Not with me. I have enough to do. Test your cunning elsewhere.) If you do this a few times you will begin to intuit it in every argument.

    1) EXPRESSIVE (emotional): a type of argument where a person expresses a positive or negative opinion based upon his emotional response to the subject.

    2) SENTIMENTAL (biological): a type of argument that relies upon one of the five (or six) human sentiments, and their artifacts as captured in human traditions, morals, or other unarticulated, but nevertheless consistently and universally demonstrated preferences and behaviors.

    3) MORAL (normative) : a type of argument that relies upon a set of assumedly normative rules of whose origin is either (a)socially contractual, (b)biologically natural, (c) economically necessary, or even (d)divine. (Also: RELIGIOUS)

    4) RATIONAL (logical) – Most philosophical arguments rely upon contradiction and internal consistency rather than external correspondence.

    5) HISTORICAL (analogical): A spectrum of analogical arguments – from Historical to Anecdotal — that rely upon a relationship between a historical sequence of events, and a present sequence events, in order to suggest that the current events will come to the same conclusion as did the past events, or can be used to invalidate or validate assumptions about the current period.

    6) SCIENTIFIC (directly empirical): The use of a set of measurements that produce data that can be used to prove or disprove an hypothesis, but which are subject to human cognitive biases and preferences. ie: ‘Bottom up analysis”

    7) ECONOMIC: (indirectly empirical): The use of a set of measures consisting of uncontrolled variables, for the purpose of circumventing the problems of direct human inquiry into human preferences, by the process of capturing demonstrated preferences, as expressed by human exchanges, usually in the form of money. ie: “Top Down Analysis”. The weakness of economic arguments is caused by the elimination of properties and causes that are necessary for the process of aggregation.

    8) RATIO-EMPIRICAL (Comprehensive: Using all above): A rationally articulated argument that makes use of economic, scientific, historical, normative and sentimental information to comprehensively prove that a position is defensible under all objections. NOTE: See “Styles of Argument” below.

    9) TRUTHFUL: categorically consistent, Internally consistent (logical), Externally Correspondent (Instrumentally observable), Operationally articulated (Possible), Fully Accounted, Moral (free of imposed costs).

    10) THE TAUTOLOGICAL TRUTH – Not so much an argument but the most parsimonious verbal statement is possible.

    Curt Doolittle’s “Degrees Of Political Argument”*1, from least to most substantive: *1[capitalismv3.com 2011]

  • A Hierarchy of Argumentative Structures

    (useful) (learning propertarianism)

    [T]he next ten arguments you make, try to determine which form of argument the person is relying upon. (Not with me. I have enough to do. Test your cunning elsewhere.) If you do this a few times you will begin to intuit it in every argument.

    1) EXPRESSIVE (emotional): a type of argument where a person expresses a positive or negative opinion based upon his emotional response to the subject.

    2) SENTIMENTAL (biological): a type of argument that relies upon one of the five (or six) human sentiments, and their artifacts as captured in human traditions, morals, or other unarticulated, but nevertheless consistently and universally demonstrated preferences and behaviors.

    3) MORAL (normative) : a type of argument that relies upon a set of assumedly normative rules of whose origin is either (a)socially contractual, (b)biologically natural, (c) economically necessary, or even (d)divine. (Also: RELIGIOUS)

    4) RATIONAL (logical) – Most philosophical arguments rely upon contradiction and internal consistency rather than external correspondence.

    5) HISTORICAL (analogical): A spectrum of analogical arguments – from Historical to Anecdotal — that rely upon a relationship between a historical sequence of events, and a present sequence events, in order to suggest that the current events will come to the same conclusion as did the past events, or can be used to invalidate or validate assumptions about the current period.

    6) SCIENTIFIC (directly empirical): The use of a set of measurements that produce data that can be used to prove or disprove an hypothesis, but which are subject to human cognitive biases and preferences. ie: ‘Bottom up analysis”

    7) ECONOMIC: (indirectly empirical): The use of a set of measures consisting of uncontrolled variables, for the purpose of circumventing the problems of direct human inquiry into human preferences, by the process of capturing demonstrated preferences, as expressed by human exchanges, usually in the form of money. ie: “Top Down Analysis”. The weakness of economic arguments is caused by the elimination of properties and causes that are necessary for the process of aggregation.

    8) RATIO-EMPIRICAL (Comprehensive: Using all above): A rationally articulated argument that makes use of economic, scientific, historical, normative and sentimental information to comprehensively prove that a position is defensible under all objections. NOTE: See “Styles of Argument” below.

    9) TRUTHFUL: categorically consistent, Internally consistent (logical), Externally Correspondent (Instrumentally observable), Operationally articulated (Possible), Fully Accounted, Moral (free of imposed costs).

    10) THE TAUTOLOGICAL TRUTH – Not so much an argument but the most parsimonious verbal statement is possible.

    Curt Doolittle’s “Degrees Of Political Argument”*1, from least to most substantive: *1[capitalismv3.com 2011]

  • Conceptual Laundry: Twitter.

    Philosophy, to be true, must be critical. There are no answers in philosophy itself. It’s conceptual laundry detergent. Philosophy consists either of telling us how to speak truthfully, or it is just a means of loading, framing and overloading The greatest lies in history have been produced philosophically: monotheism, marxism, freudianism, postmodernism. Philosophy has done more harm that good. That’s because it’s an exceptional vehicle for deception by suggestion. Philosophy can be performed wishfully, morally, rationally, historically, and scientifically. Only the last has any value. Does your government improve cooperation and exchange, or create conflict and takings? That’s an easy question to answer. But why must we persist in a submissive mythos of federation, truth, trust and love, instead of just truth, trust and love? The Church then chartered nobility with love and trust – and left them to war and justice (production). They federated our tribes The Church manufactured idealism, and used Love to break kin and tribal biases, extending trust, and creating economic velocity. Aristocracy must rule by the formal logic of cooperation: non parasitism expressed as property. Else be ruled by worse. That is my answer to yesterday’s question about the failure of South Africa and the genocide conducted against its farmers. Rule of law, and production of commons are two different things. Democracy is a catastrophe because it merges law and commons. Failing to parent the young, and failing to parent less advanced polities differ only in scale. Aristocracy must parent. Take nothing not paid for. Master a craft. Speak the truth. Safeguard the weak. Mete justice. Improve commons. Show love. Add beauty. Cultures vary in their needs for commons. But rule of law, common law, property rights are objectively universal for all men. Rule of Law and Contractually Constructed Commons are different things. Rulers can adjudicate while leaving commons to locals. Rule and Colonization are two different things. Rule by rule of law and strict property rights is objectively universally moral. Religions evolved for the poor. Philosophy for the middle. And Law for the Ruling classes. The three metodologies reflect perceived control. Islam is a religion of submission, Christianity less so. But western Aristocracy is a cult of non-submission to man, government, or god. I don’t like analogies. They’re used to lie. Myths are analogies. But at least Christianity’s myths teach us love, truthfulness and beauty. The obvious failure of progressivism is that it is constructed entirely of lies. It isn’t philosophy then. It’s just lying. Cultures are not equal. They suppress parasitism more or less, display corruption more or less, and speak the truth more or less.

  • Conceptual Laundry: Twitter.

    Philosophy, to be true, must be critical. There are no answers in philosophy itself. It’s conceptual laundry detergent. Philosophy consists either of telling us how to speak truthfully, or it is just a means of loading, framing and overloading The greatest lies in history have been produced philosophically: monotheism, marxism, freudianism, postmodernism. Philosophy has done more harm that good. That’s because it’s an exceptional vehicle for deception by suggestion. Philosophy can be performed wishfully, morally, rationally, historically, and scientifically. Only the last has any value. Does your government improve cooperation and exchange, or create conflict and takings? That’s an easy question to answer. But why must we persist in a submissive mythos of federation, truth, trust and love, instead of just truth, trust and love? The Church then chartered nobility with love and trust – and left them to war and justice (production). They federated our tribes The Church manufactured idealism, and used Love to break kin and tribal biases, extending trust, and creating economic velocity. Aristocracy must rule by the formal logic of cooperation: non parasitism expressed as property. Else be ruled by worse. That is my answer to yesterday’s question about the failure of South Africa and the genocide conducted against its farmers. Rule of law, and production of commons are two different things. Democracy is a catastrophe because it merges law and commons. Failing to parent the young, and failing to parent less advanced polities differ only in scale. Aristocracy must parent. Take nothing not paid for. Master a craft. Speak the truth. Safeguard the weak. Mete justice. Improve commons. Show love. Add beauty. Cultures vary in their needs for commons. But rule of law, common law, property rights are objectively universal for all men. Rule of Law and Contractually Constructed Commons are different things. Rulers can adjudicate while leaving commons to locals. Rule and Colonization are two different things. Rule by rule of law and strict property rights is objectively universally moral. Religions evolved for the poor. Philosophy for the middle. And Law for the Ruling classes. The three metodologies reflect perceived control. Islam is a religion of submission, Christianity less so. But western Aristocracy is a cult of non-submission to man, government, or god. I don’t like analogies. They’re used to lie. Myths are analogies. But at least Christianity’s myths teach us love, truthfulness and beauty. The obvious failure of progressivism is that it is constructed entirely of lies. It isn’t philosophy then. It’s just lying. Cultures are not equal. They suppress parasitism more or less, display corruption more or less, and speak the truth more or less.

  • THE EXPANSION OF PERCEPTION 1) All language is allegory to experience. The most

    THE EXPANSION OF PERCEPTION

    1) All language is allegory to experience. The most complex terms are simply increasingly loaded combinations of basic experiences.

    2) as we evolved, the content of our communication changed: things that are deducible or imaginable rather than visible, audible etc.

    2) Our experiences are limited. We can only sense so much on our own, with the physical bodies that we have to work with.

    3) Language allows us to collect a greater range of experiences than we can on our own. Even experiences separated by time and space.

    4) Our ‘calculative’ (not computational) ability is limited. We can only ‘figure out’ so much on our own.

    5) Language allows others to help us calculate what we could not calculate on our own.

    6) Systems of measurement allow us to ‘sense’ what we cannot sense with our senses alone.

    7) Systems of calculation and computation let us compare and contrast what we cannot figure out on our own.

    8 ) Language, Measurement, and Calculation and Reason allow us to extend our perceptions, and to create symbols that we can manipulate with the limited abilities that we do possess.

    9) The purpose of philosophy is to test, integrate, reconstruct, rearrange, evaluate, prioritize and articulate our body of knowledge to our advantage given the new information available to our senses by way of our tools, measurements, communications, and calculations, so that we can make best use of the information at our disposal.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-27 11:24:00 UTC

  • EDUCATION We do it wrong. 1) Reading and writing. 2) Testimony( witness, grammar

    EDUCATION

    We do it wrong.

    1) Reading and writing.

    2) Testimony( witness, grammar, rhetoric, logic, moral law, contract). 3) History(technical,organizational,economic,artistic).

    4) Arithmetic( arithmetic, checkbooks, accounting, credit and interest, banking),

    5) Mathematics(algebra, trigonometry, statistics, calculus),

    6) Economics (micro-economics, institutions of cooperation, macro-economics).

    7) Physics(physics, chemistry, biology).

    Note the absence of politics and indoctrination.

    Get a job as young as you can. Youth employment not immigrant employment. Elderly employment, not immigrant employment.

    Travel for a year or two in your late teens. Borrowing to travel is the best investment you can make in your youth. Parochialism is the greatest liability you can most easily overcome. ( Look at the Mormons )

    Or do two years in military service learning emergency skills, crowd control, civil defense, and the basics of weapons, fire, movement, communication and fitness.

    Then go to college. If you go to college you can learn a skill: a quantitative discipline. Or you can seek entertainment: non-quantitative fields.

    College is a *shitty* filter with not enough variation in filtration. Little of it is useful. And universities teach and distribute cathedral ignorance. Learning selflessness, cooperation, variation, emergency and fighting teaches you to be successful regardless of what technical skill you possess.

    Then learn a technical skill: the hardest that you can manage and feel confident in using.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-27 03:12:00 UTC

  • HIERARCHY OF ARGUMENT STRUCTURE (useful) (learning propertarianism) The next ten

    HIERARCHY OF ARGUMENT STRUCTURE

    (useful) (learning propertarianism)

    The next ten arguments you make, try to determine which form of argument the person is relying upon. (Not with me. I have enough to do. Test your cunning elsewhere.) If you do this a few times you will begin to intuit it in every argument.

    1) EXPRESSIVE (emotional): a type of argument where a person expresses a positive or negative opinion based upon his emotional response to the subject.

    2) SENTIMENTAL (biological): a type of argument that relies upon one of the five (or six) human sentiments, and their artifacts as captured in human traditions, morals, or other unarticulated, but nevertheless consistently and universally demonstrated preferences and behaviors.

    3) MORAL (normative) : a type of argument that relies upon a set of assumedly normative rules of whose origin is either (a)socially contractual, (b)biologically natural, (c) economically necessary, or even (d)divine. (Also: RELIGIOUS)

    4) RATIONAL (logical) – Most philosophical arguments rely upon contradiction and internal consistency rather than external correspondence.

    5) HISTORICAL (analogical): A spectrum of analogical arguments – from Historical to Anecdotal — that rely upon a relationship between a historical sequence of events, and a present sequence events, in order to suggest that the current events will come to the same conclusion as did the past events, or can be used to invalidate or validate assumptions about the current period.

    6) SCIENTIFIC (directly empirical): The use of a set of measurements that produce data that can be used to prove or disprove an hypothesis, but which are subject to human cognitive biases and preferences. ie: ‘Bottom up analysis”

    7) ECONOMIC: (indirectly empirical): The use of a set of measures consisting of uncontrolled variables, for the purpose of circumventing the problems of direct human inquiry into human preferences, by the process of capturing demonstrated preferences, as expressed by human exchanges, usually in the form of money. ie: “Top Down Analysis”. The weakness of economic arguments is caused by the elimination of properties and causes that are necessary for the process of aggregation.

    8) RATIO-EMPIRICAL (Comprehensive: Using all above): A rationally articulated argument that makes use of economic, scientific, historical, normative and sentimental information to comprehensively prove that a position is defensible under all objections. NOTE: See “Styles of Argument” below.

    9) TRUTHFUL: categorically consistent, Internally consistent (logical), Externally Correspondent (Instrumentally observable), Operationally articulated (Possible), Fully Accounted, Moral (free of imposed costs).

    10) THE TAUTOLOGICAL TRUTH – Not so much an argument but the most parsimonious verbal statement is possible.

    Curt Doolittle’s “Degrees Of Political Argument”*1, from least to most substantive: *1[capitalismv3.com 2011]

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-24 05:32:00 UTC

  • #tcot #tlot #NRx Philosophy consists either of telling us how to speak truthfull

    #tcot #tlot #NRx Philosophy consists either of telling us how to speak truthfully, or it is just a means of loading, framing and overloading

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-22 11:19:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/623814713105862656

  • Names (truth) vs Analogies (deceits)

    [A] sequence of operations consists of names. I can name that sequence of operations. An experience or an observation or an imagination of cause and effect is an analogy. Names may or may not convey meaning. THey may or may not convey loadings which we, as moral creatures, feel are terribly important. But operations are names and experiences are analogies. I have a pretty low opinion of meaning. It’s a vehicle for comprehension yes.

    But that comprehension is by definition loaded. And loading and framing are means of deceit.

    Source: (1) Curt Doolittle

  • Names (truth) vs Analogies (deceits)

    [A] sequence of operations consists of names. I can name that sequence of operations. An experience or an observation or an imagination of cause and effect is an analogy. Names may or may not convey meaning. THey may or may not convey loadings which we, as moral creatures, feel are terribly important. But operations are names and experiences are analogies. I have a pretty low opinion of meaning. It’s a vehicle for comprehension yes.

    But that comprehension is by definition loaded. And loading and framing are means of deceit.

    Source: (1) Curt Doolittle