(FB 1551882156 Timestamp) Note to self: Epistemology Mathiness (‘proof’) b/c Scale Ind. It Works: Justification b/c human scale Science: falsification b/c beyond human scale It’s Philosophers were “Fooled by Mathiness”. Mathematics = scale independent measurement (Position) All else is scale dependent measurement, using measurement system available to man: human operations and analogy to operations we can experience.
Theme: Measurement
-
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
(FB 1551888383 Timestamp) Really. We can tell your class and intelligence by your appearance, behavior and speech. Neurons function as an economy.
-
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
(FB 1551888383 Timestamp) Really. We can tell your class and intelligence by your appearance, behavior and speech. Neurons function as an economy.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1552010801 Timestamp) NOPE NOPE —“Curt: What would (….) in a propertarian society?”— PROP IS A METHOD. Propertarianism is a methodology, consisting of a set of methodologies, a set of definitions, and a set of arguments, that produce a commensurable language, complete the scientific method, and embody that scientific method into rule of law. What you do with that law is wide open – it just has to be transparent, and it will prohibit all sorts of lying in public about whatever order you have. P-law is extremely facist out of the box – it is extremely nationalistic, and extremely intolerant, and especially intolerant of our ancient enemy’s means of deceit. And It is very hard to engage in malfeasance under P-Law since it is simply too profitable for individuals to report criminals for fun and profit. It is a ruthless system of government for enemies of the productive people. It has no mercy for enemies foreign or domestic. FOR MY PEOPLE My focus has been on correcting the United states first, and the other european states second. I recommend, for my people, and my people alone, because my people alone appear capable of it: 0 – An independent judiciary of the natural law 1 – A militia of all able bodied men in the regimental model, attached to a ‘church’/’school’. A standing army of professional warriors, and citizen employees of the military who are inducted in emergencies, since an increasing scope of military work is technical and administrative. 2 – A Hereditary Monarchy with a professional cabinet 3 – Virtual Houses of Governors, Industry, Business, Labor, and Family(homeowners). Where house members are selected randomly from the population, to provide assent or dissent to proposals by the monarchy in the raising and use of taxes. And where all houses must ‘pass’ (ascend). 4 – A near prohibition on bureaucracy; all government service “at the pleasure of the monarchy”; and a prohibition on pensions for public servants. 5 – My understanding is that this would provide all the benefits of fascism without the need for a dictator-character and the attendant risk. Even then, there is no reason a monarch cannot appoint such a person as did the romans, in times of crisis or need. FLIPPED INCENTIVES This produces a very different set of incentives since everyone is always and everywhere accountable for everything. MIDDLE CLASS IS HARD TO BEAT Monarchies appear to run better governments until they cannot. They cannot when the commercial complexity reaches the point of choosing limited investments from a host of possible investments. In this case the middle class appears to do well UNTIL they start socializing losses and privatizing the commons or engaging in arbitrage against the long term interests of the people. FEDERATION Any number of these monarchies can be federated under a supreme court of the natural law, just as the church federated the monarchies under church ‘license’ – the principle value of the court and the church being the ‘delegitimization’ of a ruler or a government, there by sanctioning the people and neighbors to replace that ruler, in the european tradition. This would, I expect, be rare, since royal families are extremely intolerant of family members who risk their status – and often make them ‘disappear’. My preference (Fantasy) would be to restore the anglo empire, and the germanic (Holy roman) empire, and to complete the intermarium and end the conflict of the 20th century brought about by ((())) the enemies of our people under the banner of world communism and the destruction of our peoples. FOR OTHER PEOPLES For other peoples I recommend a flexible system of government not terribly different from the Roman and English:
- Fascism (Generalship) for time of war or conflict.
- Monarchies with professional cabinets as long as possible
- Adding Houses of government as via negativa juries when too large. These juries must only approve/deny raising of funds by the monarchy (cabinet).
- If for some reason some semblance of democracy is necessary (it isn’t, but it may be impossible to avoid it for pragmatic reasons) I recommend virtual houses for each of the classes and genders, where classes trade in a market rather than pass legislation by majority rule. Where resources are either equally or proportionally distributed. Then posting proposals for x months, then using a lottery (Greece) rather than politicians to select the juries (houses), then allowing the juries to conduct business (trade)
In other words, there is no ‘propertarian society’ per se other than all those societies run under rule of law by natural law. So…. You can ask me questions of natural law – ‘what would the law say about ????’ You can ask me about different political orders: “what order, or what would you recommend for ????” You can ask me what constitution I’d recommend for america or germany, or england or poland etc. “what would you recommend for????” You can ask me what I’ve put in the working constitution. As long as they are under natural law they are ‘propertarian’. If they are not then they are not.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1552174894 Timestamp) i say that there is only one metaphysics but many fictions. And therefore the use of fictions is not in fact metaphysical. And as such people who claim otherwise are engaged in fraud. As far as i know the physical, cognitive, and linguistic sciences explain every concept metaphysicians claim in their purview. As far as time an causality these are subjects sophomorically conflated but causality exists, but like all else reduced to speech can never be complete, only necessary sufficient and contingent. The same for time : which time are we talking about? What makes the change in state possible, the rate of change vary, and our memory of passage vary, and our perception of the rate of change vary? all of these answers we know. zeno was a bit of a sophist. My current understanding is that there exists nothing that cannot be explained scientifically. and thats certainly going to hold. A scientific explanation is not the same as the experience we describe with that science – this is true. If we want a separate aesthetic language for the experience that is commensurable with the scientific then that is fine. if we want to discuss the different fictions that different groups operate under thats still one metaphysics and many fiction that allow people to conceive of that beyond their direct perception then that is a vehicle for hypothesizing by analogy. I am pretty certain i can produce a proof of construction that is so parsimonious it will survive all criticism. there is nothing left that i know of other than the relationship between personality traits and reward systems and i think others know this. But one cannot work on artificial intelligence My reductionist approach requires operational language under the argument that if you cannot do so you cannot claim that you know of what you speak, and that therefore cannot make a truth claim, because you cannot claim to testify what you cannot operationally describe. and even then you may not and likely may not infer anything from you explanation. There is only one most parsimonious paradigm. that paradigm cannot be expressed as other than analogy to operational experience without the introduction of fiction. the narrative requires categories to limit sequential prose to that which is possible for human minds. all such paradigms worldwide are converging on the scientific (scientific naturalism small number of consisten universal rules). I mean. until you find a set of case that are not open to natural explanation anything anyone says about metaphysics is just nonsense. AFAIK philosophy is currently relegated to choice of preference or good an the rest is science. And i cant find an exception to that rule.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1552174894 Timestamp) i say that there is only one metaphysics but many fictions. And therefore the use of fictions is not in fact metaphysical. And as such people who claim otherwise are engaged in fraud. As far as i know the physical, cognitive, and linguistic sciences explain every concept metaphysicians claim in their purview. As far as time an causality these are subjects sophomorically conflated but causality exists, but like all else reduced to speech can never be complete, only necessary sufficient and contingent. The same for time : which time are we talking about? What makes the change in state possible, the rate of change vary, and our memory of passage vary, and our perception of the rate of change vary? all of these answers we know. zeno was a bit of a sophist. My current understanding is that there exists nothing that cannot be explained scientifically. and thats certainly going to hold. A scientific explanation is not the same as the experience we describe with that science – this is true. If we want a separate aesthetic language for the experience that is commensurable with the scientific then that is fine. if we want to discuss the different fictions that different groups operate under thats still one metaphysics and many fiction that allow people to conceive of that beyond their direct perception then that is a vehicle for hypothesizing by analogy. I am pretty certain i can produce a proof of construction that is so parsimonious it will survive all criticism. there is nothing left that i know of other than the relationship between personality traits and reward systems and i think others know this. But one cannot work on artificial intelligence My reductionist approach requires operational language under the argument that if you cannot do so you cannot claim that you know of what you speak, and that therefore cannot make a truth claim, because you cannot claim to testify what you cannot operationally describe. and even then you may not and likely may not infer anything from you explanation. There is only one most parsimonious paradigm. that paradigm cannot be expressed as other than analogy to operational experience without the introduction of fiction. the narrative requires categories to limit sequential prose to that which is possible for human minds. all such paradigms worldwide are converging on the scientific (scientific naturalism small number of consisten universal rules). I mean. until you find a set of case that are not open to natural explanation anything anyone says about metaphysics is just nonsense. AFAIK philosophy is currently relegated to choice of preference or good an the rest is science. And i cant find an exception to that rule.
-
(FB 1552576600 Timestamp) THE PERIODIC TABLE OF SPEECH There are a few fundament
(FB 1552576600 Timestamp) THE PERIODIC TABLE OF SPEECH There are a few fundamental innovations in Propertarianism 1 – The Dimensional warranty of due diligence 2 – The Periodic Table of speech (Grammars) 3 – The Operational language and grammar in ePrime 4 – The Method of producing serialized Definitions (Disambiguation) 5 – Property in toto and the completion of the anarchic program in a reduction of social science to statements of changes in the state of ‘property’ (interests). -update- (correct link to pdf version: https://curtdoolittle.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/periodic-table-of-speech-draft2-2.pdf )
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1552425769 Timestamp) most of us eventually claim we can normalize to ones and zeroes. but not enough of us realize that we can normalize to human faculties.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1552425604 Timestamp) We would produce a world of much better thinkers if we taught normalization after venn diagrams. And asked people to normalize various statements. sets are trivial. normalizations falsify the problem of sets
-
(FB 1552576600 Timestamp) THE PERIODIC TABLE OF SPEECH There are a few fundament
(FB 1552576600 Timestamp) THE PERIODIC TABLE OF SPEECH There are a few fundamental innovations in Propertarianism 1 – The Dimensional warranty of due diligence 2 – The Periodic Table of speech (Grammars) 3 – The Operational language and grammar in ePrime 4 – The Method of producing serialized Definitions (Disambiguation) 5 – Property in toto and the completion of the anarchic program in a reduction of social science to statements of changes in the state of ‘property’ (interests). -update- (correct link to pdf version: https://curtdoolittle.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/periodic-table-of-speech-draft2-6.pdf )