Propertarianism and Testimonialism together are as great an advancement over the scientific era as the scientific era was over the rationalist, and the rationalist over the mystical.
No kidding.
We can revolutionize human thought, action, existence, and history.
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-01 15:50:00 UTC
When will the pseudoscience stop?
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-01 11:18:00 UTC
CAN CHRISTIANITY FIND ROOM FOR INTELLECTUAL CHRISTIANS?
I am fairly sure at this point that my concept of christianity differs little from say Jefferson’s except in the current scientific language I would use to express it.
I practice an intellectual form of what we call christianity. It is demonstrably more pagan (the adoration of beauty, life, nature, the universe) in sentiment. It is not submissive but heroic. It is not the demand of a god, but an exchange with one. It is not mystical, but psychological and ethical, social and moral, political and economic. But it remains spiritual: a means of serving the pack by submission to, investment in, and sacrifice for, the pack (the tribe).
I pray to and take advice from my god daily. Yet I see this god as a construction of man’s collective intuition, belief, and action, and the magic of religion a product of complex consilience.
When I talk to my god he is not the semitic, egyptian or babylonian terrorist, nor the fearsome Odin, nor the importune Zeus. He is the “all-father” for certain, but he is a distinctly christian father. A wise monarch, not a pious priest or selfish demon.
Or better yet, he is the god I need him to be in order to do the work of my people – to raise my people from beast, to man, to gods all. To transform the entire universe to eden. Not to be cast out of paradise, but to construct it.
So in this sense I see Polytheism as superior for an advanced civilization: to lionize our generals and saints, artists and poets, scientists and philosophers, manufacturers, merchants, and craftsmen. Because all of us require that our gods speak to us in our our language.
But what are gods? Gods are the product of the human mind, just as are numbers and formulae, and they exist just as do numbers and formulae. They are what we wish to be if we were able, not what exists prior to us.
Is it better to practice ancestor worship, disciplined ritual, as the japanese and the stoics? It certainly appears so. Is it problematic to practice nature worship, seek advice of the gods? I do not see reason to. I can pray to the soul of aristotle and if I understand him well enough hear his advice. Prayer is a means of circumventing your cognitive biases by a ritual act of submission to the pack. We hear the truth in prayer because we cannot lie to ourselves before an the knowing gods.
If Christianity can find room for Intellectual Christians then why must it remain ‘truth’ rather than ‘myth and allegory’? Surely a tea ceremony, or the daily ritual of diary planning and writing are personal rituals rather than political. While prayer remains a mixture of personal and political. But all three quiet the mind so that we can listen to intuition gained from the study or experience of the ideas of great minds free of the multitude of biases that cloud our minds.
Christianity can be expressed as an entirely rational system of thought. The premise is very simple: extend love of kin to non kin, and in doing so construct trust, and trust will produce prosperity. When paired with aristocracy and chivalry, this comprises the western character: heroism: the construction of personal excellence for the purpose of service to and advancement of the tribe.
That we create god within us is more important for us than to explain the vicissitudes of nature – the universe is definitely hostile to human life.
If I agree with the Catholic philosophers and Mormon practice, why is there no room for those men of science (truth) who need even FEWER biases and comforts in order to gain access to our intuitions? We need fewer excuses and incentives to think and act in Christian fashion, other than because of our station or disposition we understand that limiting consumption and contributing to the commons with our thoughts, feelings, and efforts is
you see, I understand the cancer that is monopoly in any form, and the genius that is what we call balance of powers, but is better considered a division of labor. For in that division we produce multiple excellences, and through voluntary exchange we find the golden mean: the optimum path for many specialists rather than the only possible path for monopolists.
The church is meaningless and rudderless without aristocracy. Aristocracy is meaningless without the church. Without the competition between Nobility, Priesthood and Burgher (bourgeoisie), two must be subject to the whim of one rather than each in constant excellence each conducting exchanges, and where those exchanges form an information system by which we investigate all three possible dimensions of social order as specialists, use each that we find advantageous, and continue to evolve. Meanwhile each keeps the other from abuses by a competition for power.
This was our western secret and we have abandoned it for the folly of monopoly government by the lower classes in which we simply lie and cheat and manipulate outside of government and using government rather than between the great houses of state, church and industry.
A man must be educated by the church and the aristocracy and industry. He can then specialize to suit his abilities: education and care-taking, invention and production, law and order.
I do not see the value in the bible that I see in our great literature. I see value in a church, in a priesthood, in a mythos, and in rituals. I do not see the value in heaven that I see in the natural world. I do not see the value in false gods that I see in past saints and heroes. I do see a true god, and a truthful god, that seeks to parent us through our evolution such that we may transform the universe into the garden of eden. And that god has many faces.
It has taken me a long time to understand that across all of mankind the words spoken in ritual whether field, temple or church, are meaningless. It is the safety we feel in ritual that matters – our feeling of membership in the pack and the great comfort that it brings to us no matter what the forum (including TED talks for the new hippie era).
We need a christian reformation as well as a restitution. And we need to kill forever the monopoly of the heresy that is state-run-secular-humanism as one of the great failed experiements – another great lie – in human history. A heresy that is a monopoly, and as a monopoly NOT CHRISTIAN OR WESTERN but middle eastern.
It is not only islam we must purge from the west, but democratic secular humanism: the worship of the state: the worst false god man has invented in two thousand years.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-01 03:38:00 UTC
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_of_sex_differencesEND THE PSEUDOSCIENCE: OUR BRAINS ARE DIFFERENT
OUR BEHAVIOR IS DIFFERENT. OUR STRATEGIES ARE DIFFERENT.
(and our distribution on the solipsism <—> autism scale is dramatic.)
Source date (UTC): 2015-12-01 03:06:00 UTC
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2015/10/22/china-shows-how-to-build-nuclear-reactors-fast-and-cheap/100 NEW NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN CHINA
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-30 10:35:00 UTC
(As far as I know, there is very little that can compete with hydrocarbons other than nuclear power (steam), and there isn’t much logical or scientific evidence to suggest there will be. So the sooner we build one safe reactor per million people, the sooner we will get away from hydrocarbons. Because it is only at that scale that nuclear energy will approach the cost of hydrocarbons, and no other technology holds anywhere near the promise. Radioactive material decays no matter what we do. The universe is full of it. And you can keep refining it forever.)
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-30 09:09:00 UTC
Actually I don’t know the manosphere, red pill, nrx, alt-right, shitlord lingo. I read science and economics and stuff like books, journals and papers. And Ieave the fun stuff to the fun guys. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-30 06:36:00 UTC
THE GREAT LIARS AND THE GREAT LIE
**They Mastered The Art of the Great Lie**
Version 1: monotheism and christianity – using preachers pulpits
Version 2: pseudoscience: boaz, marx, freud, cantor, (keynes), mises, frankfurt, rothbard – using The Academy Lectern, New Media, and Entertainment Arts.
In both the ancient and modern world, they told lies for women and slaves.
The Bigger The Lie The More Outrageous The More Effective At Using Words To Disconnect Imagination From Reality – that is the purpose of the great lies: to use altruism of the group to disconnect imagination from reality.
Women are more easily affected by both the incentive of altruistic submissiveness and more resistant to truth – much more so – and therefore are the easiest means of replication of great lies.
If enough women can be converted, then by means of their constant gossip, rallying and shaming, they will teach children, rebel against men, shame realists, and expand the lie to weak men, bad men,
Women are not only unequal, but they are ready vessels for the collection and distribution of imaginary falsehoods. This is just history now not suspicion. The fall of the west has been achieved through the grant of political power to women who of their nature are less likely to grasp reality, and more desirous of fantasy.
In the ancient world they spread the lie first to women and slaves.
In the modern world they inspired women to free slaves in an attempt to obtain political power themselves. They repeated the effort of freeing the slaves at the expense of civil war, and obtained political power. And within one generation used it to incrementally undermine the west.
The Great Liars, The Great Lies, and The Folly of Women.
The fist time it is a fluke, accident or interpretation. The second time it is a strategy composed of a simple tactics: use women and weak men to create and distribute a great lie that destroys the virtue of the west: the people who tell the truth, and the truth’s correspondence with reality.
And the great liars even destroyed science and rule of law.
What shall be the penalty for this great crime of the Christian and Postmodern Worlds? What is our means of restitution? Perhaps “2000 years of silence”?
The Truth Is Enough. Enough to Cure Russia. Enough To Restore The West. Science is the Discipline of Truth Telling. Law is the Forum for Demanding It. We Must Use Law To End The Lies. And With It The Destruction Of The Liars.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-26 02:16:00 UTC
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10585240MORE ON MBTI AND OTHER PERSONALITY MODELS – INCLUDING MY OWN
(worth repeating)
FWIW: Here is how I look at it:
1) big five factor a) has correlation of observation but no basis in evolutionary construction, and b) is very clearly biased by freudian authoritarian feminist rather than aristocratic excellence and innovation. This method helps diagnosis but not causality. If that is its purpose then that’s fine.
2) The Alternative Five Factor reflects my understanding of the current state of evolutionary impulses. When combined with IQ, class, and gender they probably represent the best we have so far.
3) the problem is that as a grid, they aren’t easily translated into stereotypes that we can empathize with. It’s bad enough that we are limited when we deal in one or two dimensions of analysis, but in five we just don’t function that well. And it takes a lot of training to use it.
4) MBTI is pretty useful because we can anthropomorpize 16 different ideal types, and that’s pretty rich, without being confusing. You can teach it to almost anyone. And in the workplace you can figure out how to talk to someone using it. While any individual test has a high error rate, taking the test repeatedly over time will tend to help you understand yourself as one or more of the personalities on the grid. On the other hand, statistically, it’s incredibly predictive of behaviors and tastes in large numbers, so it has to be fairly accurate model regardless of its accuracy.
So the reason I like it is that it can be used by people to assist in cooperating on the work place and I don’t know any other model that’s better, and I”ve been doing this since 1982.
5) Curt’s Model (from very early studies)
In the method I learned, we use these four factors:
1) Dominance-Submission, (aggressiveness)
2) Extroversion-Introversion, (internal vs external dependence)
3) Patience-Impulsivity (need for rewards)
4) Risk Attraction – Blame Avoidance (want of new experience)
I have added this one for ’empathy’ and it’s an innovation I think.
5) Solipsistic(female) – Autistic(male)
Based upon the work of (what’s his name.. lol)
And this last is always present in every case, but impolitic:
6) Intelligence.
Intelligence is the only linear measure with higher being better. All others are equilibrating, with ‘average’ being the optimum.
As far as I know this six factor model is the most accurate to date, and none other is superior. That said,
As far as I know these have evolutionary bases in all creatures not just humans.
As far as I know this is one of the secrets to human adaptability: we can express variations in these traits fairly rapidly in response to stresses, and reproduce those traits as well by selection.
ALSO: This reflects my understanding of the chemical processes that drive us:
—“Cloninger suggests that the three dimensions,
1) novelty seeking,
2) harm avoidance, and
3) reward dependence,
are correlated with low basal dopaminergic activity, high serotonergic activity, and low basal noradrenergic activity, respectively”—
With the fourth being:
4) persistence (unstated cause )
FOR MORE INFORMATION SEE:
The Dopaminergic Theory Of Evolution
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10585240
This is still the working theory I operate by.
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-25 13:02:00 UTC
OVERSING’S MISSION (AND AN ESSAY ON THE WORLD OF WORK)
The central problem of science is not one of improving the scientific method or the conduct of scientific investigation, or even the effort of investigation, it is one of eliminating errors in human perception, bias, cognition, and knowledge in the process of applying the scientific method to scientific investigation.
The central problem of demonstrated intelligence is not one of improving IQ but of eliminating asymmetries of information, costs of information acquisition, and reduction of error in the use of information – science makes us smarter by the identification of, and application of, general principles instead of a multitude of specific rules.
Likewise, the central problem of workplace excellence is not increasing incentives, but decreasing disincentives and malincentives: frictions, obstacles, and informational asymmetries on one hand, and developing experience at the craft on the other.
The central cause of frictions, obstacles, and informational asymmetries is the use of human infrastructure to collect and distribute information: middle management, rather than the use of technological infrastructure.
Just as accounting was a technology necessary to overcome the limits of human perception, bias, cognition, memory as the scale of our production and trade increased, we need a method of overcoming the limits of human perception, cognition, memory and bias in the work place.
Why? Because technology has no personal ambition, no political alliances, cannot and does not hide information, nor seek discounts and rents. The purpose of middle management is i) mentorship in the craft the group practices, ii) to collect and distribute information – but both at the cost of bias and rent-seeking (a nice word for the soft form of corruption.)
If we collect and distribute information technologically both upward to executives, and rely upon a using technology to create a commons: a market for knowledge of one another’s ability, we create transparency (truthfulness), and eliminate bias, rents and malincentives.
For much of the past century, social scientists, particularly in the field of economics, have been attempting to solve the question of the high cost of middle management and the evolution of bureaucratic self interest, inflexibility, and organizational calcification. But we have had no alternative to human infrastructure. And where we do have an alternative, it often is equally biased: Key Performance Indicators (KPI), as well as the most reductio of measurements: profit and loss – and all with no comparable measure of the frictions, obstacles, attempts at discounts by transferring effort between individuals and groups.
Just as privacy has evolved into an irrelevant issue because once we abandon our concern for it, instead of hiding information, we work to constantly improve our reputations on the one hand and recognize we all go through phases of maturity and make the same errors, and so forgive one another of those errors on the other.
Those who demand privacy today are generally engaged in preserving some self delusion of greater economic, social or moral status than they in fact possess – and we and they would benefit from truth over fiction.
Social media has made the church confessional unnecessary. We confess our sins in public as did the first christians and in doing so are forgiven by one another – because we all are human and commit the same foolish errors of each phase of our lives.
We can use the same techniques inside the workplace to create transparency, understanding, and trust – assuming the work performed is in fact objectively ethical and moral – and we can provide mentorship in the craft, self-regulation of the community, and information distribution from executives to staff, as well as bubbling up problems and opportunities from staff to executives. This transparency and trust creates a flatter organization with more engagement, fewer rents, and greater interpersonal commitment and loyalty to one another, to the group and to the organization.
The counter argument is that there are only so many good people in the world. The answer to that argument is that people follow incentives. And immoral and unethical people are the exception when they are subject to ethical and moral incentives.
Another is that people will only work so hard. And the answer to that argument is i) why is it that you wish to extract work from people that they do not wish to provide at the compensation that you provide them with, and ii) the externalities produced by doing so are always worse than the benefits gained from trying. (american workplaces still contain vast buckets of unethical and immoral behavior – particularly in government, insurance, investment, cell phone and cable television industries. And vast buckets of rent-seeking and free-riding in government, finance and big businesses.)
I want to create a world of workplaces that I would want to work in on one hand and want to be serviced by on the other. Where I had support from peers, and honesty from executives and management. And where I receive support and service from companies I purchase from. Where no one profits from deceit or involuntary transfer.
Oversing will take three to five years of additional development to have enough features and statistical information to fulfill the role of human infrastructure, and ten perhaps to begin to alter the world of work. But that’s our heroic ambition: to change the world of work forever – to eliminate what we call ‘alienation’ in the workplace. To build an ethical, moral, and enjoyable place to work, that thrills customers consistently.
To build a better world for humans to live in.
Curt Doolittle
Founder and CEO,
Reality By Chanting
Creators of Oversing.
Source date (UTC): 2015-11-25 03:33:00 UTC