I TOLD YOU SO…
A Moral License
A Set of Demands
A Means of Transition
A Method of altering the status quo.
Welcome to the revolution.
Source date (UTC): 2019-01-11 16:23:00 UTC
I TOLD YOU SO…
A Moral License
A Set of Demands
A Means of Transition
A Method of altering the status quo.
Welcome to the revolution.
Source date (UTC): 2019-01-11 16:23:00 UTC
–“PHILOSOPHY MUST BE DRAGGED OUT OF THE IVORY TOWER AND INTO THE MARKETPLACE OF IDEAS”–
Um. I don’t think so. Unless it has a dramatic reformation.
via negativa, measurement, science, economics, and law, versus via positiva, philosophy, theology, occult, daydreaming.
While I find no difference between theorizing and philosophizing that is because I do not engage in empty verbalisms or sophisms, pseudosciences, nor the magic of ignoring costs.
Philosophy can be laundered such that philosophizing(imaginary and verbal) and theorizing (existential and actionable) are essentially identical by the use of operational language, the full accounting of costs, and a preface of the choice of goods as those of the equalitarian herd, or the hierarchical pack.
But as practiced, and as the demotion of the discipline to a peer to theology has evidenced, measuring, theorizing, philosophizing, and theologizing are simply analogous to description, deduction, induction, abduction, and guessing, using increasingly specious excuses for one’s guesswork.
The athenian tradition did not account for costs. There are two principle reasons for it:
(1) the peerage was small and wealthy with common interests – and costs were as rude then as today
(2) discussion of costs immediately changes from ideals to reals thereby self selecting into class interests
(3) mathematical idealism influenced greco-roman thought so heavily, giving such sophism an unearned legitimacy.
(4) historically religion spoke in these ideal terms, philosophy an improvement upon them, and empiricism an improvement upon philosophy, and science an improvement upon empiricism, just as ‘Testimonialism’ is an improvement upon science. (empiricism vs science distinguished by the 20th’s implementation of operational language, and testimonialism by the completion of the scientific method).
It is time for philosophy to either abandon idealism, sophism, and the ignorance of costs, or to be further demoted into the theology of ideals.
Otherwise, like theology, it cannot compete in the marketplace of ideas.
That is what the evidence shows us.
People ask me every single day what philosophy to read and I tell them ‘none of it’ other than perhaps the bookends of Aristotle and Nietzsche. The rest is all measurement, science, economics, Law, and history.
There are no crimes equal to those of abraham, saul, and mohammed in the ancient world, and marx, freud, boas, in the 19th, and adorno, derrida and foucault in the 20th. We can complain about Augustine and Aquinas as apologists, but by them the damage was done.
It is very hard to criticize archimedes, democritus, aristotle, epicurus, zeno in the ancient world, and bacon, newton, hobbes, lock, smith, hume in the modern, or poincare, maxwell, darwin, menger, pareto, spencer, nietzsche and many others in the 19th, and einstein, watson-crick, and the many others in the 20th.
Precision of our knowledge increases thereby justifying the pack, offset by counter-revolutions in denial, sophism, pseudoscience, and supernaturalism expanding the herd. And the war between neolithic feminine dysgenic herd strategy of the levant, and the bronze age masculine eugenic pack strategy of indo europeans.
Truth is undesirable to the many.
—
https://www.newstatesman.com/2019/01/philosophy-must-be-dragged-out-ivory-tower-and-marketplace-ideas?
Source date (UTC): 2019-01-10 09:42:00 UTC
10) with the right legal, constitutional, and economic incentives, a church can be restored that will evolve away from current addictions and to future health out of institutional self interest, and return to its position as a competitor to the state and the market.
Source date (UTC): 2019-01-10 00:35:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1083160292308193280
Reply addressees: @DataDistribute @MusaVaino @BenBurgis
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1083154649618751488
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/1083154649618751488
4) It is not my job to invent via-positivas. It is the markets job to provide non-criminal ‘goods’.
5) Very serious well understood problems exist esp post 1900. These problems are all solvable by constitutional amendments. I work regularly on these amendments. Law = Engineering.
Source date (UTC): 2019-01-10 00:24:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1083157552324583424
Reply addressees: @DataDistribute @MusaVaino @BenBurgis
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1083154649618751488
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/1083154649618751488
January 8th, 2019 12:34 PM [Y]es. I know the propertarian paradigm is difficult. Propertarianism = Natural Law = The completion of the scientific method = the reformation of the social sciences from pseudosciences to hard sciences = algorithmic, strictly constructed, common law of reciprocity, testimonial speech, and the warranty of due diligence of that speech = the means of constructing a scientific government = an explanation of the west’s success in the ancient and modern worlds, and the west’s survival from semitic, abrahamism. It used to be that the idea of science was as difficult as this idea of social science. Sorry. Paradigm shifts of this scale are just hard.
January 8th, 2019 12:34 PM [Y]es. I know the propertarian paradigm is difficult. Propertarianism = Natural Law = The completion of the scientific method = the reformation of the social sciences from pseudosciences to hard sciences = algorithmic, strictly constructed, common law of reciprocity, testimonial speech, and the warranty of due diligence of that speech = the means of constructing a scientific government = an explanation of the west’s success in the ancient and modern worlds, and the west’s survival from semitic, abrahamism. It used to be that the idea of science was as difficult as this idea of social science. Sorry. Paradigm shifts of this scale are just hard.
I know the paradigm is difficult.
Propertarianism = Natural Law = The completion of the scientific method = the reformation of the social sciences from pseudosciences to hard sciences = algorithmic, strictly constructed, common law of reciprocity, testimonial speech, and the warranty of due diligence of that speech = the means of constructing a scientific government = an explanation of the west’s success in the ancient and modern worlds, and the west’s survival from semitic, abrahamism.
It used to be that the idea of science was as difficult as this idea of social science.
Sorry. Paradigm shifts of this scale are just hard.
Source date (UTC): 2019-01-08 12:34:00 UTC
We have the answer. But no answer is popular enough to implement by existing means. We can’t currently even reform criminal law, education, finance, family and marriage law. The only possible means of achieving our ends, is the organized application of violence.
Source date (UTC): 2019-01-05 14:24:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1081557172650196993
Reply addressees: @TheOldOrder1 @ArktosMedia @JohnMarkSays
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1081462059622117376
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/1081462059622117376
We are enough. Revolution Comes. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2018-12-29 16:43:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1079055297455575040
Reply addressees: @ThatGunGuy2
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1079054489041154048
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/1079054489041154048
A moral license(we have one), a set of demands in constitutional form (we’ve supplied them), incentives that the majority will embrace (we’ve supplied them), a plan of transition (we will supply it), a means of altering the status quo ( never has an empire been more fragile ). 😉
Source date (UTC): 2018-12-29 16:43:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1079055217801547776
Reply addressees: @ThatGunGuy2
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1079054489041154048
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/1079054489041154048