Theme: Reciprocity

  • The left made this war by attempting to incrementally circumvent our self-determ

    The left made this war by attempting to incrementally circumvent our self-determination by rule of law, sovereignty, reciprocity, markets, family regulating reproduction, and Christian charity for those who fail.

    Revolution Comes

    https://propertarianinstitute.com/the-book/revolution/introduction-to-the-declaration-of-reformation/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-09 23:55:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336821857408983047

    Reply addressees: @ReesusP

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336814392789278720

  • Worth The Watch. Chinese may not practice truth before face, and they may not pr

    Worth The Watch.
    Chinese may not practice truth before face, and they may not practice rule of law, and they may not practice self-determination by sovereignty and reciprocity, but they are not ‘fooled’ by the ‘globalist’ project uniting the US Deep State and the Globalists https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1336524506312159233

  • HOW DOES P-LAW WORK? A short answer to a very big question

    HOW DOES P-LAW WORK?
    A short answer to a very big question:

    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2020/12/09/q-curt-how-do-you-use-p-law-to-evaluate-the-credibility-of-points-of-view/ https://t.co/XmdycjSzs0


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-09 23:02:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336808573955928064

  • Q: Curt: “How Do You Use P-Law To Evaluate the “Credibility” of Points of View”

    Q: Curt: “How Do You Use P-Law To Evaluate the “Credibility” of Points of View”

    This response answers the question – if you can understand it: 1) Non-Warranty (blame): a point of view constitutes an opinion in the absence of due diligence, which one is unwilling to warranty – an admission of ignorance, or a pretense of argument (deceit). 2) Warranty(blame): an argument constitutes a claim of undecidability, the possibility of truth, or falsehood which one is willing to warranty – a claim of knowledge, or a pretense of knowledge(deceit) 3) Truth or Falsehood: You can only make a truth claim if you can testify to it. And we can test whether you can Testify to it. And whether your Testimony is consistent under realism, naturalism, identity, internal consistency, operational possibility, external correspondence, rational choice, reciprocity in rational choice, with stated limits, full accounting within them, and parsimonious survival of competition against the market for alternatives. This suite of tests consists of the full set of dimensions to which humans can testify and therefore claim true. 4) Criminality: Furthermore, we can test means, motive, the opportunity for crimes by the test of Reciprocity: productive, exhaustively informed, voluntary transfer, warrantied for due diligence and within the limits of restitutability, to be free of imposition of costs against the demonstrated interests of others by externality. This suite of tests consists of the full set of dimensions to which humans can conduct crimes. 5) Completeness: By these two tests Reciprocity, and Testimony within Reciprocity, we can determine the undecidability, truth candidacy, or falsehood of any claim of testimony. 6) Measurement: The formal operational logic of analysis is called operationalism, and the principle technique is constructing systems of measurement out of language, by enumeration and disambiguation by serialization. Then fully expanding sentences into promissory, operational, complete, transactions absent the pretense of knowledge of the verb to be. 7) Systems of Measurement: We have formalized all speech into a table we call The Grammars, that disambiguates deflationary, normal, and inflationary speech into the full set of techniques from logic and math ant one and to normal speech in the center, to lies at the other end. 8) Systems of Deceit: We have formalized the techniques of deceit with equal depth, but I don’t feel like typing that much here because as in all things the means of falsehood are nearly infinite while the means of truth is nearly singular. 9) Learning the P-Law methodology is like learning three years of programming, economics, and law simultaneously, it takes a +130 IQ with education in the physical sciences, and basic familiarity with economics about six months, and talented people about three years.  What does that mean? It means you’re probably overloaded with my answer. But this particular answer ends philosophy and completes the scientific method and the aristotelian project, and the five thousand years of evolution of european civilization’s nearly exclusive, gradual, discovery, adaptation to, and application of the formal (logical), physical, behavioral(natural), and evolutionary laws of the universe. OnlineDummies Version (in progress) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2019/11/10/p-for-dummies/Truthhttps://propertarianinstitute.com > Main Menu > Methodology > On Truth Reciprocityhttps://propertarianinstitute.com/the-book/reciprocity/Lies(Deceits)https://propertarianinstitute.com > Main Menu > Methodology > On Deceits Short Definition of Abrahamic Method of Deceit (female strategy of undermining): https://propertarianinstitute.com/2020/05/31/the-definition-of-abrahamism-2/

  • Q: Curt: “How Do You Use P-Law To Evaluate the “Credibility” of Points of View”

    Q: Curt: “How Do You Use P-Law To Evaluate the “Credibility” of Points of View”

    This response answers the question – if you can understand it: 1) Non-Warranty (blame): a point of view constitutes an opinion in the absence of due diligence, which one is unwilling to warranty – an admission of ignorance, or a pretense of argument (deceit). 2) Warranty(blame): an argument constitutes a claim of undecidability, the possibility of truth, or falsehood which one is willing to warranty – a claim of knowledge, or a pretense of knowledge(deceit) 3) Truth or Falsehood: You can only make a truth claim if you can testify to it. And we can test whether you can Testify to it. And whether your Testimony is consistent under realism, naturalism, identity, internal consistency, operational possibility, external correspondence, rational choice, reciprocity in rational choice, with stated limits, full accounting within them, and parsimonious survival of competition against the market for alternatives. This suite of tests consists of the full set of dimensions to which humans can testify and therefore claim true. 4) Criminality: Furthermore, we can test means, motive, the opportunity for crimes by the test of Reciprocity: productive, exhaustively informed, voluntary transfer, warrantied for due diligence and within the limits of restitutability, to be free of imposition of costs against the demonstrated interests of others by externality. This suite of tests consists of the full set of dimensions to which humans can conduct crimes. 5) Completeness: By these two tests Reciprocity, and Testimony within Reciprocity, we can determine the undecidability, truth candidacy, or falsehood of any claim of testimony. 6) Measurement: The formal operational logic of analysis is called operationalism, and the principle technique is constructing systems of measurement out of language, by enumeration and disambiguation by serialization. Then fully expanding sentences into promissory, operational, complete, transactions absent the pretense of knowledge of the verb to be. 7) Systems of Measurement: We have formalized all speech into a table we call The Grammars, that disambiguates deflationary, normal, and inflationary speech into the full set of techniques from logic and math ant one and to normal speech in the center, to lies at the other end. 8) Systems of Deceit: We have formalized the techniques of deceit with equal depth, but I don’t feel like typing that much here because as in all things the means of falsehood are nearly infinite while the means of truth is nearly singular. 9) Learning the P-Law methodology is like learning three years of programming, economics, and law simultaneously, it takes a +130 IQ with education in the physical sciences, and basic familiarity with economics about six months, and talented people about three years.  What does that mean? It means you’re probably overloaded with my answer. But this particular answer ends philosophy and completes the scientific method and the aristotelian project, and the five thousand years of evolution of european civilization’s nearly exclusive, gradual, discovery, adaptation to, and application of the formal (logical), physical, behavioral(natural), and evolutionary laws of the universe. OnlineDummies Version (in progress) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2019/11/10/p-for-dummies/Truthhttps://propertarianinstitute.com > Main Menu > Methodology > On Truth Reciprocityhttps://propertarianinstitute.com/the-book/reciprocity/Lies(Deceits)https://propertarianinstitute.com > Main Menu > Methodology > On Deceits Short Definition of Abrahamic Method of Deceit (female strategy of undermining): https://propertarianinstitute.com/2020/05/31/the-definition-of-abrahamism-2/

  • RT @curtdoolittle: @InscrutableKid @Jade22805149 @realDonaldTrump The Natural La

    RT @curtdoolittle: @InscrutableKid @Jade22805149 @realDonaldTrump The Natural Law (science) upon which our Constitution depends, dictates t…


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-09 16:50:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336714767176773638

  • The Natural Law (science) upon which our Constitution depends, dictates that pun

    The Natural Law (science) upon which our Constitution depends, dictates that punishment for crimes under that Natural Law, consist of 1. Restitution, 2. Punishment, and 3. Prevention: For your crimes you must pay restitution, suffer punishment severe enough to prevent repetition.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-09 16:49:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336714720548704257

    Reply addressees: @InscrutableKid @Jade22805149 @realDonaldTrump

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336711992560771072

  • There is no difference between Natural Law of Reciprocity and Rational Choice. A

    There is no difference between Natural Law of Reciprocity and Rational Choice. All choices are rational. natural law is rational. And it’s exceptionless.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-09 02:22:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336496351732002816

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336495974517264387


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    Yet another one. 😉

    Look. Legal philosophy is finished, and all philosophy relegated to choice (not truth). P-Law provides the formal logic of strictly constructed, (textual, original intent) transactional law. Sorry. Law schools teach philosophy and procedure not law. 😉 https://t.co/dQtAByxWnb

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1336495974517264387

  • Sigh. Falsify: Reciprocity (productive, exhaustively informed, warrantied, volun

    Sigh. Falsify: Reciprocity (productive, exhaustively informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of involuntary imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others by externality and within the limits of restitution (reversal)). Science:Tort(Tresspass) = Natural Law.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-09 02:08:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336492847835574274

    Reply addressees: @EuclidsPoint

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336490285455585280

  • In the main, smart is less valuable than moral. A people raised, trained, and ed

    In the main, smart is less valuable than moral.

    A people raised, trained, and educated in TRIFUNCTIONAL traditions:
    1. Military(state-heroic),
    2. Legal(social-reciprocal), and;
    3. Christian(personal-charitable);
    … don’t need to be smart.
    We need to be moral and not dumb. https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1336309011084431362