Curt Doolittle

Theme: Science

  • Sorry but Science Solved Morality – Morality Is Closed,.

    —“so yes, science can tell us what is but not what we ought to do.”—

    This is a justificationary position (sophism). |Decidability| = That which is not irreciprocal or false (negatively consequential) -> Value (personal strategy -> Positively Consequential) -> Preference (Inconsequential) Science (law) tells us what we may not do (irreciprocity) – that which is unethical, and immoral. Anything that is not unethical and immoral is merely a PREFERENCE to be settled in the market competition for means and ends. What we ‘ought’ to do is anything we CAN organize voluntarily TO DO that which is not false or irreciprocal. Even so, we can just as equally test positive moral claims by the investments that you make, the externalities caused, and desired outcomes produced. All truth propositions are falsificationary. All moral claims are merely claims that one acts not immorally. All moral propositions, means, and outcomes are testable by reciprocity. All moral propositions are open to triangulation of the returns on investments (compare by ordinality if not cardinality). All moral propositions are decidable by adversarial competition in markets for voluntary production of moral outcomes, given scarcity and competition for means and outcomes. All markets produce empirical results, and as such are scientific. All epistemological questions are the result of falsification by adversarial competition. All moral questions are epistemological questions. All not-evil-immoral-unethical propositions are amoral, ethical, or good, depending upon the means of organizing their production, the structure of their production, and the returns on that production. We can make a claim to means, externalities, or ends, or all three. We can measure the claim, the means, the ends – all three, and do so scientifically. There is nothing in metaphysics, language, psychology, or sociology that cannot be expressed scientifically in these terms. That is a purely scientific statement. Conversely you cannot deny or falsify this statement. Period. If you don’t use these terms one can claim ignorance, on can claim expediency(cost), but one cannot claim anything else. As far as I know, The question of Morality is closed. You can try to create test after test but you will find no test that fails this test.

  • “What theoretical advance does Propertarianism assert for itself?”

    —“I agree with a good deal what you say. But none of this is particularly new. Propertarianism is a sort of restatement of English Common Law combined with modern Economics 101. Economics tells us that the proper role of the state is to prevent/punish externalities. English Common Law developed over centuries – albeit in a groping-in-the-dark sort of way – precisely to prevent/punish externalities even though the theory of externalities wasn’t fully understood until last century. Propertarianism seems to me to be basically true because Economics 101 is theoretically elegant as the English Common Law is empirically robust. All I’m saying is that I fail to see anything innovative in Propertarianism. What theoretical advance does Propertarianism assert for itself?”—Calixto Muni

    Formal operational logic, extension of commercial suppression of hazard to political speech, ending baiting into hazard, and rent seeking, and undermining of the natural law. For example, how do you test Truthful speech in court? What is the test of tort (reciprocity)? How can we prevent redefinition of legal terms that are insufficiently defined in order to circumvent the law’s dependence upon them. How can we strictly construct law closed to interpretation? How do we return undecidable cases to the legislature? How do we stop the legislature from constructing unconstitutional law before inserting it into the polity? Was via negativa constitutional monarchy really worse or better? Why do we need multiple houses for the classes instead of single house parliaments. Why has democracy failed, and where did we go wrong? What was the west’s group evolutionary strategy and why was it different from other civilizations, and why did it produced outsized responses? How do we stop another overthrow of our civlization through the abrahamic technique of undermining by false promise of escape from physical and natural law in exchange for undermining host polities and creating dark ages – this time with boasian anthropology, freudian psychology, marxism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism – the use of pseudoscience and sophism to undermine our market for cooperation between the classses at the cost of suppressing the reproduction of the underclasses, so that we can devote surpluses from those savings to the production of increasingly productive high trust commons? How do we reform the polity given what we’ve learned in the past century and a half (almost two)? The economic reforms will restore the family and the middle classes. The legal reforms will prevent future conquest of our peoples. The intellectual reforms will crush the academic-media-entertainment propaganda system of organized undermining of our people. The scientific reforms will end the incompatibility of the disciplines. You’re seeing correctly, that we restore common law, add the lessons of economics, and the lessons of the experiments with an open franchise government. What you’re not seeing is the completion of the construction of a constitution of formal natural law. You’re not seeing is the completion of the Aristotelian program, the end of the left’s second attempted dark age, and the renaissance that must result from the completion of the sciences by extension from the physical to the metaphysical (linguisic), psychological, and sociological, so that it is no longer possible to lie about the universe man and how we survive and evolve while in a condition of excellence. P is a huge program. This is why it takes someone like john to explain it. I built it for intellectuals who must rule and defend against ill rule. John takes it to ordinary people who desire good rule, and avoid ill rule. And those who cannot grasp either, must follow only because of the material benefits that will be the greatest restoration of the middle since the roman reforms.   ===

    Steven Kolpek From my understanding, Propertarianism is a framework that cross-references European empirical systems with each other. With that cross-referencing framework, manipulation tactics (internal and external) can be identified, defended against, and eliminated. Curt Doolittle Good. well done. Ben Messinger The thing about truth is it always has a familiar ring to it. Because truth is eternal. People who think truth must always be a revolutionary fresh 100% original idea are going to wander all their days never finding what they are looking for. Nick’s Reason The OP sees the summary, the result, not the years of development and the synthesis of numerous disparate fields into one complete work. It’s akin to normies seeing a building and saying, ‘so what, it’s obviously a building’ whilst completely discounting the huge amounts engineering involved. Stephen Wells Who cares if it’s original or not?! 🤦‍♂️ Is it what is required, will it work? Yes! Leif Erickson From my perspective the conceptual understanding is moderately challenging. The lingual aspects however take a little more time to familiarize myself with. Luke Weinhagen A smart man can communicate complex thoughts, ideas and concepts in a manner that makes then understandable. A brilliant man can communicate complex thoughts, ideas and concepts in a manner that makes them seem obvious. In the context of teaching via communication, this is the difference between competence and craftsmanship. Argentius Darkon If we were to fix the law so the law cannot be subverted to whatever label they wish to cast upon it to fit their at need basis, would be an extreme help to ending these criminals reign of treason. If we were to teach our families all about economics, this would help everyone live a much better lifestyle. These criminals have prevented almost everyone from understanding economic and law unless you are one of ‘their’ friends or family. This country wasn’t supposed to be like this, and in my opinion they have stolen most Americans lives and families future by holding them down with a heavy foot. I hate this goddamn government and want to see the Guillotine take their heads off.. No I’m not insane nor evil, this is simply what you do to people that intentionally ruin your life and country. Treason is punishable by death, like it should be..

  • “What theoretical advance does Propertarianism assert for itself?”

    —“I agree with a good deal what you say. But none of this is particularly new. Propertarianism is a sort of restatement of English Common Law combined with modern Economics 101. Economics tells us that the proper role of the state is to prevent/punish externalities. English Common Law developed over centuries – albeit in a groping-in-the-dark sort of way – precisely to prevent/punish externalities even though the theory of externalities wasn’t fully understood until last century. Propertarianism seems to me to be basically true because Economics 101 is theoretically elegant as the English Common Law is empirically robust. All I’m saying is that I fail to see anything innovative in Propertarianism. What theoretical advance does Propertarianism assert for itself?”—Calixto Muni

    Formal operational logic, extension of commercial suppression of hazard to political speech, ending baiting into hazard, and rent seeking, and undermining of the natural law. For example, how do you test Truthful speech in court? What is the test of tort (reciprocity)? How can we prevent redefinition of legal terms that are insufficiently defined in order to circumvent the law’s dependence upon them. How can we strictly construct law closed to interpretation? How do we return undecidable cases to the legislature? How do we stop the legislature from constructing unconstitutional law before inserting it into the polity? Was via negativa constitutional monarchy really worse or better? Why do we need multiple houses for the classes instead of single house parliaments. Why has democracy failed, and where did we go wrong? What was the west’s group evolutionary strategy and why was it different from other civilizations, and why did it produced outsized responses? How do we stop another overthrow of our civlization through the abrahamic technique of undermining by false promise of escape from physical and natural law in exchange for undermining host polities and creating dark ages – this time with boasian anthropology, freudian psychology, marxism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism – the use of pseudoscience and sophism to undermine our market for cooperation between the classses at the cost of suppressing the reproduction of the underclasses, so that we can devote surpluses from those savings to the production of increasingly productive high trust commons? How do we reform the polity given what we’ve learned in the past century and a half (almost two)? The economic reforms will restore the family and the middle classes. The legal reforms will prevent future conquest of our peoples. The intellectual reforms will crush the academic-media-entertainment propaganda system of organized undermining of our people. The scientific reforms will end the incompatibility of the disciplines. You’re seeing correctly, that we restore common law, add the lessons of economics, and the lessons of the experiments with an open franchise government. What you’re not seeing is the completion of the construction of a constitution of formal natural law. You’re not seeing is the completion of the Aristotelian program, the end of the left’s second attempted dark age, and the renaissance that must result from the completion of the sciences by extension from the physical to the metaphysical (linguisic), psychological, and sociological, so that it is no longer possible to lie about the universe man and how we survive and evolve while in a condition of excellence. P is a huge program. This is why it takes someone like john to explain it. I built it for intellectuals who must rule and defend against ill rule. John takes it to ordinary people who desire good rule, and avoid ill rule. And those who cannot grasp either, must follow only because of the material benefits that will be the greatest restoration of the middle since the roman reforms.   ===

    Steven Kolpek From my understanding, Propertarianism is a framework that cross-references European empirical systems with each other. With that cross-referencing framework, manipulation tactics (internal and external) can be identified, defended against, and eliminated. Curt Doolittle Good. well done. Ben Messinger The thing about truth is it always has a familiar ring to it. Because truth is eternal. People who think truth must always be a revolutionary fresh 100% original idea are going to wander all their days never finding what they are looking for. Nick’s Reason The OP sees the summary, the result, not the years of development and the synthesis of numerous disparate fields into one complete work. It’s akin to normies seeing a building and saying, ‘so what, it’s obviously a building’ whilst completely discounting the huge amounts engineering involved. Stephen Wells Who cares if it’s original or not?! 🤦‍♂️ Is it what is required, will it work? Yes! Leif Erickson From my perspective the conceptual understanding is moderately challenging. The lingual aspects however take a little more time to familiarize myself with. Luke Weinhagen A smart man can communicate complex thoughts, ideas and concepts in a manner that makes then understandable. A brilliant man can communicate complex thoughts, ideas and concepts in a manner that makes them seem obvious. In the context of teaching via communication, this is the difference between competence and craftsmanship. Argentius Darkon If we were to fix the law so the law cannot be subverted to whatever label they wish to cast upon it to fit their at need basis, would be an extreme help to ending these criminals reign of treason. If we were to teach our families all about economics, this would help everyone live a much better lifestyle. These criminals have prevented almost everyone from understanding economic and law unless you are one of ‘their’ friends or family. This country wasn’t supposed to be like this, and in my opinion they have stolen most Americans lives and families future by holding them down with a heavy foot. I hate this goddamn government and want to see the Guillotine take their heads off.. No I’m not insane nor evil, this is simply what you do to people that intentionally ruin your life and country. Treason is punishable by death, like it should be..

  • Upcoming Book on Human Intelligence

    Upcoming Book on Human Intelligence

    Russell T. WarnePsychologist – Data Analyst – Educator(a book answering the science-denialists) [“E]arlier today I submitted the final text for my upcoming book In the Know: Debunking 35 Myths About Human Intelligence. It feels good to have it in the hands of my publisher. There is still some work to do, but most of it is work that my publisher has to do–not me. The book has 35 chapters (one per myth), plus an introduction and a conclusion. The chapters are each short enough that they can be read in one sitting, and the language is as non-technical as possible. My goal was to have the book serve as a convenient reference that people could use to combat common incorrect ideas about intelligence. The book will be published in fall 2020. In the meantime, here are the myths that the book addresses:

    Section 1: The Nature of Intelligence Intelligence is whatever collection of tasks a psychologist puts on a test. Intelligence is too complex to summarize with one number. IQ does not correspond to brain anatomy or functioning. Intelligence is a Western concept that does not apply to non-Western cultures. There are multiple intelligences in the human mind. Practical intelligence is a real ability, separate from general intelligence. Fact: there are aspects of brain anatomy and functioning that correlate with IQ scores. Section 2: Measuring Intelligence Measuring intelligence is difficult. Content on intelligence tests is trivial and cannot measure intelligence. Intelligence tests are imperfect and cannot be used or trusted. Intelligence tests are biased against diverse populations. Section 3: Influences on Intelligence IQ only reflects a person’s socioeconomic status. High heritability for intelligence means that raising IQ is impossible. Genes are not important for determining intelligence. Environmentally driven changes in IQ mean that intelligence is malleable. Social interventions can drastically raise IQ. Brain training programs can raise IQ. Improvability of IQ means intelligence can be equalized. The reality is that geneticists have identified hundreds of DNA segments that are associated with intelligence. In fact, in some samples, genes have a larger impact than environment on IQ. Section 4: Intelligence and Education Every child is gifted. Effective schools can make every child academically proficient. Non-cognitive variables have powerful effects on academic achievement. Admissions tests are a barrier to college for underrepresented students. Section 5: Life Consequences of Intelligence IQ scores only measure how good someone is at taking intelligence tests. Intelligence is not important in the workplace. Intelligence tests are designed to create or perpetuate a false meritocracy. Very high intelligence is not more beneficial than moderately high intelligence. Emotional intelligence is a real ability that is helpful in life. It is a myth that schools can equalize children in their knowledge, academic skills, or intelligence. Section 6: Demographic Group Differences Males and females have the same distribution of IQ scores. Racial/Ethnic group IQ differences are completely environmental in origin. Unique influences operate on one group’s intelligence test scores. Stereotype threat explains score gaps among demographic groups. Section 7: Societal and Ethical Issues Controversial or unpopular ideas should be held to a higher standard of evidence. Past controversies taint modern research on intelligence. Intelligence research leads to negative social policies. Intelligence research undermines the fight against inequality. Everyone is about as smart as I am.

    35 Myths About Human Intelligence
    86790915_210269200371241_8064657175416406016_o.jpg
  • Upcoming Book on Human Intelligence

    Upcoming Book on Human Intelligence

    Russell T. WarnePsychologist – Data Analyst – Educator(a book answering the science-denialists) [“E]arlier today I submitted the final text for my upcoming book In the Know: Debunking 35 Myths About Human Intelligence. It feels good to have it in the hands of my publisher. There is still some work to do, but most of it is work that my publisher has to do–not me. The book has 35 chapters (one per myth), plus an introduction and a conclusion. The chapters are each short enough that they can be read in one sitting, and the language is as non-technical as possible. My goal was to have the book serve as a convenient reference that people could use to combat common incorrect ideas about intelligence. The book will be published in fall 2020. In the meantime, here are the myths that the book addresses:

    Section 1: The Nature of Intelligence Intelligence is whatever collection of tasks a psychologist puts on a test. Intelligence is too complex to summarize with one number. IQ does not correspond to brain anatomy or functioning. Intelligence is a Western concept that does not apply to non-Western cultures. There are multiple intelligences in the human mind. Practical intelligence is a real ability, separate from general intelligence. Fact: there are aspects of brain anatomy and functioning that correlate with IQ scores. Section 2: Measuring Intelligence Measuring intelligence is difficult. Content on intelligence tests is trivial and cannot measure intelligence. Intelligence tests are imperfect and cannot be used or trusted. Intelligence tests are biased against diverse populations. Section 3: Influences on Intelligence IQ only reflects a person’s socioeconomic status. High heritability for intelligence means that raising IQ is impossible. Genes are not important for determining intelligence. Environmentally driven changes in IQ mean that intelligence is malleable. Social interventions can drastically raise IQ. Brain training programs can raise IQ. Improvability of IQ means intelligence can be equalized. The reality is that geneticists have identified hundreds of DNA segments that are associated with intelligence. In fact, in some samples, genes have a larger impact than environment on IQ. Section 4: Intelligence and Education Every child is gifted. Effective schools can make every child academically proficient. Non-cognitive variables have powerful effects on academic achievement. Admissions tests are a barrier to college for underrepresented students. Section 5: Life Consequences of Intelligence IQ scores only measure how good someone is at taking intelligence tests. Intelligence is not important in the workplace. Intelligence tests are designed to create or perpetuate a false meritocracy. Very high intelligence is not more beneficial than moderately high intelligence. Emotional intelligence is a real ability that is helpful in life. It is a myth that schools can equalize children in their knowledge, academic skills, or intelligence. Section 6: Demographic Group Differences Males and females have the same distribution of IQ scores. Racial/Ethnic group IQ differences are completely environmental in origin. Unique influences operate on one group’s intelligence test scores. Stereotype threat explains score gaps among demographic groups. Section 7: Societal and Ethical Issues Controversial or unpopular ideas should be held to a higher standard of evidence. Past controversies taint modern research on intelligence. Intelligence research leads to negative social policies. Intelligence research undermines the fight against inequality. Everyone is about as smart as I am.

    35 Myths About Human Intelligence
    86790915_210269200371241_8064657175416406016_o.jpg

  • Well. The canon is rather obvious nonsense that fundamentalists cannot seem to g

    Well. The canon is rather obvious nonsense that fundamentalists cannot seem to get past. The question of Deism remains possible and Physical and Natural laws eradicate conflict. The left both uses Darwin against the religious right, and denies Darwin against the scientific right.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-26 18:29:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232734430185299970

    Reply addressees: @CrusaderSvcs

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232733581153312771

  • This is the answer you know. All political conflict is reducible to this one que

    This is the answer you know.

    All political conflict is reducible to this one question.

    The entirety of the left’s spectrum of ideology serves only to deny the Darwinian revolution and the necessity of paternal, hierarchical, market meritocratic consumption and reproduction.

    LEFT: Maternal, equalitarian, dysgenic devolutionary

    The left denies evolutionary pressure and necessity exists.

    -vs-

    RIGHT: Paternal, meritocratic, eugenic evolutionary.

    The right only debates its cause: intent rather than accident.

    This is why the right is ‘right’.

    Revolt. Separate. Continue to Speciate.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-26 18:08:00 UTC

  • All left ideology serves one purpose: to deny the Darwinian revolution and the n

    All left ideology serves one purpose: to deny the Darwinian revolution and the necessity of paternal, hierarchical, market meritocratic consumption and reproduction.

    The pseudoscientific left denies evolutionary pressure exists.

    The religious right only debates its cause.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-26 17:56:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232726194174464001

  • The entire ideology of the left is to deny the Darwinian revolution and the nece

    The entire ideology of the left is to deny the Darwinian revolution and the necessity of paternal, hierarchical, market meritocratic consumption and reproduction.

    The left denies evolutionary pressure exists.
    The right only debates its cause.

    This is why the right is ‘right’.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-26 17:50:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232724530948382720

  • Postmodernism is one of the counter-enlightenments against science and reason. I

    Postmodernism is one of the counter-enlightenments against science and reason. It’s the most successful because it’s the purest form of sophistry yet: social construction by sophistry without dependence on theology.

    #Conservatives #Republican @realDonaldTrump

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-26 15:01:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232682000273825792