Theme: Science

  • Propertarianism and Testimonialism provide the Wilsonian synthesis: merging scie

    Propertarianism and Testimonialism provide the Wilsonian synthesis: merging science, philosophy morality and law. https://t.co/7rYh6VKb3k


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-11 18:12:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664505907292819456

  • and Testimonialism provide the Wilsonian synthesis: merging science, philosophy

    http://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/664505907292819456/photo/1/large?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=fb&utm_campaign=curtdoolittle&utm_content=664505907292819456Propertarianism and Testimonialism provide the Wilsonian synthesis: merging science, philosophy morality and law. https://t.co/7rYh6VKb3k


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-11 13:12:00 UTC

  • This is an inaccurate statement. The correct is: general rules of arbitrary prec

    This is an inaccurate statement. The correct is: general rules of arbitrary precision possess limits of prediction.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-10 18:33:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664148842368102400

    Reply addressees: @SanguineEmpiric

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664111460960698368


    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/664111460960698368

  • So I am trying cure science of its incompleteness – which this article confirms

    So I am trying cure science of its incompleteness – which this article confirms.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-10 18:24:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664146653969039360

    Reply addressees: @SanguineEmpiric

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664111308300652544


    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/664111308300652544

  • Propertarianism and Testimonialism complete science and unify science, law, mora

    Propertarianism and Testimonialism complete science and unify science, law, morality and philosophy.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-10 18:23:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664146347285733376

    Reply addressees: @SanguineEmpiric

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/664111308300652544


    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/664111308300652544

  • NOT JUST NORTHER RACES AND SOUTHERN RACES, BUT GRADIENTS WITHIN THE SAME RACES A

    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613000949IT”S NOT JUST NORTHER RACES AND SOUTHERN RACES, BUT GRADIENTS WITHIN THE SAME RACES AND TRIBES

    (for those new followers, my position is that ‘circumpolar peoples’ -meaning north-baltic sea, han, korean, and japanese – have practiced both climate-selection, manorial-(economic)-selection, and the physical culling of malcontents for thousands of years. And that the ‘lesser peoples’ are burdened by not having experienced this eugenic process. … Worse, I argue that we may have passed ‘peak human’ and are in the process of devolution, because the Southern peoples compete by higher aggression, lower pro-social behavior, higher impulsivity, lower intelligence, and higher rates of reproduction. In other words, the problem is the distribution of abilities within races not necessarily racial differences themselves.)

    FROM: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613000949

    –“It has become increasingly evident that human populations have different behavioral propensities and intelligence levels. Those who have adapted to the harsh northern climate worldwide are taller, more intelligent, more pro-social, less crime prone, and exhibit less fertility. This is said to be due to the more cognitively demanding long winter season (Lynn, 2006 and Lynn, 2008). In a similar and more speculative vein, the differential r/K theory (Rushton, 1988 and Rushton, 1994) predicts that a more demanding cold climate has induced more intelligent and pro-social personality in general.

    While these differences in intelligence and behavioral traits were reported mainly with respect to racial categories in the twentieth century (Herrnstein and Murray, 1994 and Rushton, 1994), even finer gradients of these personality traits from all over the world have been reported in the twenty-first century (Lynn, 2006, Lynn, 2010, Lynn, 2012, Lynn and Vanhanen, 2002, Lynn and Vanhanen, 2006 and McDaniel, 2006).

    Since nation states like Italy and Spain exhibit north–south differences in their behavioral propensities in the above expected directions, it is natural to expect the same gradients in other parts of the world. In Japan, although casual observation sometimes admits that regional behavioral and IQ differences result in relatively poor economic performances in the south, there exists only one paper suggesting regional IQ differences on Okinawa, the southernmost region (Agarie, 1959). Serious inquiry on this topic has been effectively prohibited due to the political correctness and self-censorship in Japanese academia. Since various kinds of IQ tests such as the WISCor Progressive Matrices were no longer being conducted after the 1970s, this paper examines this conjecture by utilizing national achievement test scores from Japan’s 47 prefectural populations.

    Additionally, income returns to IQ premium are calculated at the prefectural level so that it could be included in the database of the robust IQ/income relationships reported to date (Jencks, 1972, Herrnstein and Murray, 1994, Murray, 1998, Murray, 2002, Altonji and Pierret, 2001, Zax and Rees, 2002 and Hanushek and Woessmann, 2008).”—-


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-09 05:00:00 UTC

  • What is the difference between truthful testimony, the disciplines of science, a

    What is the difference between truthful testimony, the disciplines of science, and of philosophy?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-08 21:52:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/663474073465397248

    Reply addressees: @AllooCharas @SpiritSplice

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/663472921264979972


    IN REPLY TO:

    @AllooCharas

    @curtdoolittle @SpiritSplice Why when you are talking political philosophy?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/663472921264979972

  • No idea what that means. Can you make that criticism in scientific language?

    No idea what that means. Can you make that criticism in scientific language?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-08 21:45:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/663472423245848576

    Reply addressees: @AllooCharas @SpiritSplice

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/663471919128256512


    IN REPLY TO:

    @AllooCharas

    @curtdoolittle @SpiritSplice A Subjective idealist then?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/663471919128256512

  • Video Notes: On The Future of Religion by Harari

    “There is a huge gap between liberalism and the life sciences.”-Yuval Harari https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6BK5Q_Dblo [T]HOUGHTS: 1) Any entity with which we can cooperate need only observe the principle of non-imposition of costs either directly or through externality, which we institutionalize as property rights. Whether mechanical or biological, natural life or artificial life, cooperation is dependent upon this single principle. 2) It is certainly true that by analogy the human organism consists of processes that calculate the perpetuation of the organism. that does not influence the principle of cooperation – non-imposition – whatsoever. 3) Because both evolutionary necessity and the desire to cooperate rather then engage in murder, harm, theft, fraud, free riding, conspiracy, enslavement, conversion, invasion, and war – provide *decidability* by the the same principle of cooperation: the non-imposition of cost. 4) since we compete and there is no evidence that we will not, then any technological innovation will merely increase the rate of our competition with one another for status, and continue to increase our differences. 5) The reason liberalism, consumerism, and technological innovation have such influence over our lives is our wealth generated under consumer capitalism. But in a world where few of us are productive, most of us live in dependence, and a minority (Pareto’s 20%) produce and organize production, that means a great number of people must seek status (mating) by means of non-productive signaling. The uncomfortable option of large numbers of young men is one the world has encountered many times in the past, and is the source of all revolutions. 6) There is very little reason to develop a computer that thinks like us, because we are in a constant battle between pre-property individuals who acquire regardless of cost to others, and cooperating members of a group who do not. And the need to preserve ‘cheaters’ in order to preserve both the moral intuition to cooperate and the moral intuition to punish cheaters. If we can empathize with cheaters we can then cheat. To identify cheaters we must be able to empathize with them. If we were to build a machine with the same method of thinking of man, then it would also, like HAL’s lie, know how to cheat. For this reason the most valuable computers are those that think only with acquisition, property, and voluntary exchange, and like title registries, cannot violate property. 7) As far as we know, Patriarchy arose with property, when the value of male’s productivity allowed him to control female’s sex affection and reproduction . Females evolved as the property of bands of related males who preyed upon competing males to obtain their females, just as males humans prey(ed) upon competing male’s sheep, goat, cattle, and land. Females evolved gossip to rally and shame males into constraining alphas. 8) Socialism and Communism are based upon PSEUDOSCIENCE, not rationality. Rationality is weaker than myth over multiple generations. All major religions are supported by rational argument. It is dependent upon superstitious mythology not pseudoscience. Religions function as a means of limiting the government (nobility), and limiting men and women in the society. (Harari misrepresents natural law for what I assume are cultural reasons of interpretation.) The basis of western civilization is natural law of necessity for peaceful cooperation. That is quite different from dependent upon natural order. Laws of Nature(pseudoscience) are different from Natural Law(science), just as Rule by Law(command) is different from Rule of Law(limits on lawmaking). These are precise and technical terms that are abused in the public discourse. 9) Matriarchal societies constrain inheritance of property to the female line, but as far as we (I) know, they are always ruled by headmen. 10) Harari tried but he carries his cultural bias by demonstrating asymmetric criticism and praise. But we all do and none of us can escape it. I am as biased by my anglo aristocratic heritage as Kant and Heidegger are by theirs, and Marx and Harari are by theirs. This is due in no small part to the challenge of eliminating dependence for meaning and decidability upon introspective judgement. Harari is advocating universalism of cosmopolitanism (the Jewish enlightenment) just as surely as every single German advocates the German enlightenment, americans advocate Jeffersonian Contractualism. And there are some of us trying desperately trying to transcend the failures of the anglo, french, german, and ashkenazi enlightenments – all of which are simply restatements of their local group evolutionary strategy in universalist terms, by merely secular restatement their mythos. Hence my emphasis on the only universal rule: not how can we cooperate best, but why should we cooperate at all, if predation is preferable? The fist question of ethics is “Why don’t I kill you and take your territory, women and things?” All other positions are deceptive attempts to reason by fraud. And that is just how it is. And that is what separates the west from the rest: we invented ‘truth’ by which we mean ‘scientific objective truth’, testimony regardless of how we feel about it. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Video Notes: On The Future of Religion by Harari

    “There is a huge gap between liberalism and the life sciences.”-Yuval Harari https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6BK5Q_Dblo [T]HOUGHTS: 1) Any entity with which we can cooperate need only observe the principle of non-imposition of costs either directly or through externality, which we institutionalize as property rights. Whether mechanical or biological, natural life or artificial life, cooperation is dependent upon this single principle. 2) It is certainly true that by analogy the human organism consists of processes that calculate the perpetuation of the organism. that does not influence the principle of cooperation – non-imposition – whatsoever. 3) Because both evolutionary necessity and the desire to cooperate rather then engage in murder, harm, theft, fraud, free riding, conspiracy, enslavement, conversion, invasion, and war – provide *decidability* by the the same principle of cooperation: the non-imposition of cost. 4) since we compete and there is no evidence that we will not, then any technological innovation will merely increase the rate of our competition with one another for status, and continue to increase our differences. 5) The reason liberalism, consumerism, and technological innovation have such influence over our lives is our wealth generated under consumer capitalism. But in a world where few of us are productive, most of us live in dependence, and a minority (Pareto’s 20%) produce and organize production, that means a great number of people must seek status (mating) by means of non-productive signaling. The uncomfortable option of large numbers of young men is one the world has encountered many times in the past, and is the source of all revolutions. 6) There is very little reason to develop a computer that thinks like us, because we are in a constant battle between pre-property individuals who acquire regardless of cost to others, and cooperating members of a group who do not. And the need to preserve ‘cheaters’ in order to preserve both the moral intuition to cooperate and the moral intuition to punish cheaters. If we can empathize with cheaters we can then cheat. To identify cheaters we must be able to empathize with them. If we were to build a machine with the same method of thinking of man, then it would also, like HAL’s lie, know how to cheat. For this reason the most valuable computers are those that think only with acquisition, property, and voluntary exchange, and like title registries, cannot violate property. 7) As far as we know, Patriarchy arose with property, when the value of male’s productivity allowed him to control female’s sex affection and reproduction . Females evolved as the property of bands of related males who preyed upon competing males to obtain their females, just as males humans prey(ed) upon competing male’s sheep, goat, cattle, and land. Females evolved gossip to rally and shame males into constraining alphas. 8) Socialism and Communism are based upon PSEUDOSCIENCE, not rationality. Rationality is weaker than myth over multiple generations. All major religions are supported by rational argument. It is dependent upon superstitious mythology not pseudoscience. Religions function as a means of limiting the government (nobility), and limiting men and women in the society. (Harari misrepresents natural law for what I assume are cultural reasons of interpretation.) The basis of western civilization is natural law of necessity for peaceful cooperation. That is quite different from dependent upon natural order. Laws of Nature(pseudoscience) are different from Natural Law(science), just as Rule by Law(command) is different from Rule of Law(limits on lawmaking). These are precise and technical terms that are abused in the public discourse. 9) Matriarchal societies constrain inheritance of property to the female line, but as far as we (I) know, they are always ruled by headmen. 10) Harari tried but he carries his cultural bias by demonstrating asymmetric criticism and praise. But we all do and none of us can escape it. I am as biased by my anglo aristocratic heritage as Kant and Heidegger are by theirs, and Marx and Harari are by theirs. This is due in no small part to the challenge of eliminating dependence for meaning and decidability upon introspective judgement. Harari is advocating universalism of cosmopolitanism (the Jewish enlightenment) just as surely as every single German advocates the German enlightenment, americans advocate Jeffersonian Contractualism. And there are some of us trying desperately trying to transcend the failures of the anglo, french, german, and ashkenazi enlightenments – all of which are simply restatements of their local group evolutionary strategy in universalist terms, by merely secular restatement their mythos. Hence my emphasis on the only universal rule: not how can we cooperate best, but why should we cooperate at all, if predation is preferable? The fist question of ethics is “Why don’t I kill you and take your territory, women and things?” All other positions are deceptive attempts to reason by fraud. And that is just how it is. And that is what separates the west from the rest: we invented ‘truth’ by which we mean ‘scientific objective truth’, testimony regardless of how we feel about it. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine