Morality = Reciprocity. And it has to be. Moral norms are members of a portfolio (network) that may be reciprocal or not. Moral intuitions vary by the individual’s reproductive balance of reciprocity vs proportionality in the given set of moral norms. So whenever speaking of ‘morality’ which thing are you talking about? Ideal knowable (reciprocity). Ideal unknowable (anything not immoral and therefore irreciprocal is moral. What we mean is, what’s good? Not what’s moral?) Moral Norm (evolved market for prohibitions), Moral intuition (your bias given your reproductive and survival demands) – in other words, your tolerance for proportionality. Curt Doolittle
Theme: Reciprocity
-
Morality = Reciprocity.
Morality = Reciprocity. And it has to be. Moral norms are members of a portfolio (network) that may be reciprocal or not. Moral intuitions vary by the individual’s reproductive balance of reciprocity vs proportionality in the given set of moral norms. So whenever speaking of ‘morality’ which thing are you talking about? Ideal knowable (reciprocity). Ideal unknowable (anything not immoral and therefore irreciprocal is moral. What we mean is, what’s good? Not what’s moral?) Moral Norm (evolved market for prohibitions), Moral intuition (your bias given your reproductive and survival demands) – in other words, your tolerance for proportionality. Curt Doolittle
-
“Can you relate in-group vs out-group to morality = reciprocity ?”—Scott Clare
—“Can you relate in-group vs out-group to morality = reciprocity ?”—Scott Claremont
Morality = Rules of cooperation
INGROUP VS OUTGROUP
1. Ingroup,
2. outgroup
… a. outgroup trade,… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=472302760033286&id=100017606988153
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-25 14:21:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176864215749091336
-
“Can you relate in-group vs out-group to morality = reciprocity ?”—Scott Clare
—“Can you relate in-group vs out-group to morality = reciprocity ?”—Scott Claremont
Morality = Rules of cooperation
INGROUP VS OUTGROUP
1. Ingroup,
2. outgroup
… a. outgroup trade,
… b. outgroup boycott,
… c. outgroup competitor,
… d. outgroup parasite
… e. outgroup predator
Ingroup by definition = cooperation (moral)
Ingroup always requires reciprocity.
Ingroup oten requires investment (risk)
Ingroup often requires insurance
Ingroup may require subsidy.
Outgroup by definition only requires utility.
Outgroup may or may not require reciprocity
Outgroup does not require investment (risk)
Outgroup does not demand insurance
Outgroup does not require subsidy.
Outgroup non-cooperation is disutilitarian
Outgroup non-cooperation does not require reciprocity
Outgroup non-cooperation does not require investment
Outgroup non-cooperation does not require insurance
Outgroup non-cooperation does not require subsidy
Outgroup enemy is harmful
Outgroup enemy requires irreciprocity
Outgroup enemy requires costs to impose costs
Outgroup enemy requires destruction of their insurance
Outgroup enemy requires destruction of their subsidies
Lesson: you can’t use one rule for scale.
Humans are monkeys that want to imitate or follow a single pre-cognitive intuitions rather than think (remember or reason).
But spectra require disambiguation and thought.
There are no points(ideal types) only lines (spectra). 😉
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-25 10:20:00 UTC
-
“It is common for people to confuse the good (productive) with the moral (recipr
–“It is common for people to confuse the good (productive) with the moral (reciprocal).”– Curt Doolittle
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 19:38:07 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176581596260028416
-
And you might want to also understand GSRRM
And you might want to also understand GSRRM
https://propertarianism.com/2019/02/23/definition-gsrm-or-gsrrm/
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 17:01:59 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176542305756561408
Reply addressees: @BrendanVlass @MynameisMud9 @StefanMolyneux
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176542050541539328
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@BrendanVlass @MynameisMud9 @StefanMolyneux And it helps if you understand the Abrahamic Method Of Deceit:
https://propertarianism.com/2019/07/09/a-short-course-on-abrahamism-and-the-jq/Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1176542050541539328
IN REPLY TO:
@curtdoolittle
@BrendanVlass @MynameisMud9 @StefanMolyneux And it helps if you understand the Abrahamic Method Of Deceit:
https://t.co/1pnbG43EJGOriginal post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1176542050541539328
-
“Ending the False Promise of the NAP”
“Ending the False Promise of the NAP”
https://propertarianism.com/2019/05/26/ending-the-false-promise-of-the-nap/
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 16:59:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176541645136904193
Reply addressees: @BrendanVlass @MynameisMud9 @StefanMolyneux
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176533746817724416
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176533746817724416
-
That would be a worthwhile discussion. I’ve written one thorough piece for Stefa
That would be a worthwhile discussion. I’ve written one thorough piece for Stefan’s followers that answers the issue. NAP is arbitrary and trivial which is why it has appeal, while Reciprocity is empirical and complete and independent of the individual’s opinion of scope.
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 16:14:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176530393404760066
Reply addressees: @BrendanVlass @MynameisMud9 @StefanMolyneux
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176514945652932610
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176514945652932610
-
“It is common for people to confuse the good (productive) with the moral (recipr
–“It is common for people to confuse the good (productive) with the moral (reciprocal).”– Curt Doolittle
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 15:38:00 UTC
-
MORALITY = RECIPROCITY You don’t understand. it’s empirical. scientific. It does
MORALITY = RECIPROCITY
You don’t understand. it’s empirical. scientific. It doesn’t matter what you i or anyone else opines.
You are welcome to falsify (a) goods and bads refer to caloric… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=471668173430078&id=100017606988153
Source date (UTC): 2019-09-24 12:36:31 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1176475498307891200