Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • APPARENTLY DEEP PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS ARE NOT DEEP AT ALL – JUST WORD GAMES -A

    APPARENTLY DEEP PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS ARE NOT DEEP AT ALL – JUST WORD GAMES -AND HERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES.

    >>Wo are you?

    Empty verbalism by substitution. Translation. “What is the name you that exists?” (meaningless) People call me by an identifier. Do you mean instead what preferences do I hold? Do you mean instead what abilities can I demonstrate? Do you mean instead, what actions have I taken? Do you mean instead, what memories I can recall? Any use of the verb to-be in a philosophical question is a form of deceit by substitution and suggestion.

    >>>what are our ”selves” made of?

    Do you mean, under what conditions would I no longer demonstrate expected behavior to others? Do you mean under what conditions would i begin to recognize a change in my behavior? Do you mean under what conditions would I no longer recognize a recording of myself as familiar?

    I think the answer to both of these questions is (a) cognitive biases and preferences of genetic origin, and (b) experiences we retain in memory, (c) the means by which we process and act upon these biases and experiences. Because that is the evidence.

    >>>example: if you would loose all your memories, who would you be?

    Another phrasing that is an empty verbal trick or deception. “Who” refers to the criteria of demarcation by others: a name, a set of memories held by others, a set of memories demonstrated by you, a set of cognitive biases demonstrated by you, and a set of means (algorithms and rules), demonstrated b you.

    One might say “I am not myself”, and others may say “he is not himself’ largely because something in one’s biases or means is inconsistent with those that one has habituated. (Habituation is a discount that does not require the effort of reason.)

    >>> is it that we(our characters), are really just the result of the experiences we had in our life?

    Our character consists of both biases and memories. At present it appears that biases are disproportionately influential in determining the experiences we seek and recall. The debate is whether these biases cause 80% of our behavior or less. The remainder is environmental (experiential). This is logical since there is an advantage to informational evolution (training), prior to its integration (genetic) through selection. But conversely, reason is weak, and greater environmental influence would increase risks of persistence.

    >>> are we merely imitating what we experience?

    We demonstrate through the information accumulated in our (very,very,very expensive)genetics, expressed in our (very expensive) biases, modified by our (expensive) algorithms(habits), and further modified by our(less expensive, but more fragile) memories, that we react to the evolutionary, inter-generational, inter-temporal, and temporal record of experiences. And it is this ‘knowledge’ accumulated in many forms that has allowed us to outwit the dark forces of entropy, time, and ignorance.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-08 09:44:00 UTC

  • The political questions we face are very different if we seek to eliminate error

    The political questions we face are very different if we seek to eliminate error, bias, and deceit, rather than if we seek to identify optimums by which to obtain discounts. People will seize the discounts no matter what. the problem is in decreasing the error, bias, and deceit, so that those opportunities are more readily visible. It’s not that we should ignore error bias and deceit so we must constantly thrash through them to find the opportunities amidst the clutter.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 15:31:00 UTC

  • NO. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR THE ORGANIZED AND INSTITUTIONALIZED APPLICATION O

    NO. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR THE ORGANIZED AND INSTITUTIONALIZED APPLICATION OF VIOLENCE FOR THE SUPPRESSION OF HARM, THEFT, FRAUD, PSEUDOSCIENCE, AND LIES.

    —“How do we realistically become less tolerant of these lies. Reading the culture of critique was pretty eye opening. But whenever I try to have conversations about this stuff with people they tend to shut down pretty hard. Is there anything we can do to get rid of pseudoscience that doesn’t involve violence?” —Pepper Le Angus

    No. All increases in criminal ability are solved by violence distributed by various forms of institutions: education, sheriff, police, judge, courts, politics, and war.

    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 11:38:00 UTC

  • Q&A: WHAT IS PLATONISM AND WHY IS IT AN ERROR? (advanced philosophy made meaning

    Q&A: WHAT IS PLATONISM AND WHY IS IT AN ERROR?

    (advanced philosophy made meaningful)

    Platonism can refer to AT LEAST the following:

    … 1) the philosophy of Plato in toto.

    … 2) that imperceptible reality is intelligible by appeal to abstract analogy.

    … 3) the use of fantasy and imaginary as substitution for ignorance or to obscure deception.

    … 4) the prior existence of abstract objects – or at least their determinism as an appeal to authority for the use of imaginary entities.

    … 5) the existence of a third reality beyond that of the physical, and the thinking – the supernatural – in which these entities exist.

    (ed: re-orderd for clarity)

    All of which are means of avoiding the COSTLY actions necessary to observe the unobservable through the development of instrumentation.

    I tend to think of it as the set of metaphysical, cultural, normative, habitual, and genetic information that users either cannot imagine exist competitors or alternatives.

    But people use it basically as a means of saving costs in order to justify their priors.

    I suspect that is because we all have a greater genetic interest in moral priors, and knowledge priors, such that we seek to preserve our investment or make use of the wayfinding that current investment allows us. So we all need bridges from whatever wayfinding we use, to some alternative.

    In other words, we have a habit of using informational substitution of the unknown as if it is of equal empirical content to the known, as a means of preserving our ability to make judgments, whether those judgments be avoidance of cost, the preservation of investments(priors), perpetuation of existing frauds, or production of new frauds.

    THIS IS PLATONISM:

    the substitution of fantasy for information as either a means of cost avoidance, of obscuring comforting and advantageous deceptions, or of preserving comforting falsehoods.

    Platonism is to philosophy(truth) what suggestion is to deceit.

    CONFLATIONISM

    I suspect that the majority of conflationsm in thinking that affects the non-European world’s thought, is the consequence of their failure to isolate the observable and actionable, from the analogistic and the narratives we use to form consensus.

    The importance of western non-conflation is something that is obvious in our institutions. We separate religion and law and science. But it is not so obvious that our martial epistemology and our sovereignty is the cause of it. (Or even if we are more mentally predisposed to it for some reason).

    Platonism is something we struggle to be rid of by operationalism, and thereby separate the deterministic (numbers from identical categories) from an imaginary reality (a mathematical reality).

    So I view operationalism as an extension of western non-conflation, and a necessary test of existential possibility, and likewise a necessary test of appeals to truth that are in fact, appeals to imagined unknowns wherein we lack knowledge of causality due to (a) cost, (b) convenient preservation of investments, (c) conveneint preservation of frauds.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 08:58:00 UTC

  • WHICH PROMISE IS MORE HONEST, AND MORE TRUE? What’s more honest? You have natura

    WHICH PROMISE IS MORE HONEST, AND MORE TRUE?

    What’s more honest? You have natural rights? God made you in his image? We are all equal?

    Or, from a long line of animals you have been domesticated. You can transition from an animal in the possession of other men, to a man who has property, in exchange for an oath, and your promise to fulfill it, in every day of your life, in the market for reproduction we call marriage; in the market for consumption we call the economy; in the market for commons we call government; in the market for defense we call war; in the market for information we call knowledge; in the market for norms we call culture. And if you swear a contract with all other sovereign men, that you will speak the truth and only the truth, impose no cost on any of those markets without payment for it in advance, and to punish all those who do otherwise, then you may too rise to sovereignty, and become man, rather than mere animal. But pray you take heed, because if you violate this oath, we will punish, deprive, or kill you for it.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-06 16:00:00 UTC

  • UM. I DO TRUTH. PROPAGANDA IS A NECESSARY TOOL IN THE ABSENCE OF THE NECESSITY O

    UM. I DO TRUTH. PROPAGANDA IS A NECESSARY TOOL IN THE ABSENCE OF THE NECESSITY OF TRUTH.

    —Q&A–“Curt, what is your opinion on Kek?—

    I am a New Right Philosopher. I work on changing our understanding of reality, and reforming our institutions to correspond to contemporary reality. My philosophy is reducible to increasing the prior scope of law from property and deception, to all information present in the commons, and the reformation of government to restore the market for commons between the classes – that have different interests. And to restore the purpose of policy to the family while preserving the purpose of law to the individual. By doing so I wish to restore our sovereignty, liberty, freedom, and subsidy, as well as our market for quality families, market for commons, market for leadership, and market for the resolution of disputes.

    I see propaganda and ridicule as a tactic against the working class just as I am using a tactic against the upper classes. So it’s just propaganda.

    I deal with truth.

    So aside from the observation that the adoption of Marxist ridicule rallying and shamming as a means of neutralizing rallying and shaming, seems to work, I don’t have any opinion. And it isn’t even vaguely interesting except that I recognize it’s value in a democracy where lies and propaganda re legal. i would prefer that all leftist parasitism was prosecutable as harm to the informational commons just as are libel and slander are harmful to individuals.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Cult of Sovereignty.

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Social Science of Western Civilization

    The Propertarian Institute, Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-06 13:43:00 UTC

  • Why do we have FREE FALSE speech rights rather than FREE TRUE speech rights? ‘Ca

    Why do we have FREE FALSE speech rights rather than FREE TRUE speech rights? ‘Cause Libel, Slander and Duel.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-06 10:47:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/795215925309886464

    Reply addressees: @BoutrousTed @Bgiant1Bob

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/789879295577587712

    IN REPLY TO:

    @BoutrousTed

    I repeat: I will represent pro bono anyone #Trump sues for exercising their free speech rights. Many other lawyers have offered to join me. https://t.co/LJf6TtmGZU

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/789879295577587712

  • Cutting and pasting? I’m one of the most prolific people working.But hey. Any ex

    Cutting and pasting? I’m one of the most prolific people working.But hey. Any excuse when w/o argument.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-05 18:24:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/794968547248181248

    Reply addressees: @Bgiant1Bob @LilDocCollins @nsa @CIA

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/794958042752286720

    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/794958042752286720

  • IN PROPERTARIANISM WE ARGUE PROSECUTORILY – You can argue to obtain approval: Sa

    IN PROPERTARIANISM WE ARGUE PROSECUTORILY

    – You can argue to obtain approval: Satisfaction: Empathy.

    – You can argue to obtain consent: Negotiation: Utility.

    – You can argue for moral demand or outrage: Moralism: Reason

    – You can argue to identify truth or falsehood: Philosophy: Rationalism

    – You can argue to identify correspondence: Science: Empiricism.

    – You can argue to identify exchange or theft: Prosecution: Testimonialism.

    You see, that’s what they don’t understand. The entire western argumentative edifice is built upon the ancient assumption of the search for consent and moral persuasion, in favor of a common good – and only in rare occasions do we depend upon science since our questions are never scientific but only of cooperation or non.

    But these are all JUSTIFICATIONARY arguments.

    If instead, we are not trying to obtain consensus or consent, we are trying to determine whether or not to use violence to resist, punish, subjugate, enslave, or kill you, then your only option is to preserve our sovereignty, by boycotting us or trading with us under productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer limited to productive externality.

    There is no need to treat the weak and parasitic as equals. They are either useful and productive or they are parasitic and harmful.

    We just need to kill enough of them that our words ring true.

    Violence used to Create Sovereignty is the Highest Virtue. Because it is from Sovereignty that Liberty, freedom, and subsidy are made possible for all. And contributions to the commons by the prohibition on their consumption, is the moral method by which we transcend this world, just by the prohibition on parasitism on pain of death is the moral method by which we transcend man.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-04 13:48:00 UTC

  • Defend pseudoscience, propaganda and deceit if you want to. Truth is enough. If

    … Defend pseudoscience, propaganda and deceit if you want to. Truth is enough. If you don’t prefer truth then: civil war.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-04 01:27:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/794350349192675333

    Reply addressees: @BurchardofWorms

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/794347614602805248

    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/794347614602805248