Could you please define objectivity, set it in context, and state limits? I have my own formulation as influenced by your thinking, but would like an independent analysis to compare the two.
(prompted by a friend sending me this: https://medium.com/@emiliorocca/objectivity-intersubjectivity-space-and-blockchain-162086fa57d1#.omkz8z85u)
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-27 09:29:00 UTC
IT”S NOT THE ANSWERS THAT ARE COMPLEX, ITS THE LANGUAGE
—I am not convinced that the answers are so complex—Stefan Panturu
Stefan,
You’re right. It’s not the answers that are complex, it’s the use of legal, financial, economic, and genetic language to express traditional moral, ethical, spiritual and cultural ideas.
This rather goofy and pretentious sounding language makes it very HARD to say something unless you really understand it.
And that’s the whole point: the reduction or elimination of error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, overloading, pseudoscience, and deceit.
This language allows us to state both our traditional cultural group strategy in scientific terms, but it also allows us to demonstrate that the left is nothing but a bunch of lying thieves.
So, yes, Propertarianism is a terrible language for COMMUNICATING, but it’s an exceptional language for speaking the truth – because you can’t speak it if you don’t know it.
And it’s an exceptional language for prosecuting the left and their religion of lying, shaming rallying, propagandizing and pseudoscience.
Mathematics, Logic, Economics, law and finance all have very specific languages for very important reasons. We are not used to discussing manners, ethics, morals, economics, politics and group evolutionary strategy in those languages.
But it turns out that we can. And because we can, we can defeat the left with truth just as the left defeated moral men with pseudoscience, propaganda and lies.
Curt Doolittle
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-25 17:25:00 UTC
Conversely, the reason people use loaded verse is to deceive: to cast as universal that which is particular
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-25 11:47:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790882507923288064
Reply addressees: @harrison_partch @SnapPopCrackle
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790880774451032064
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/790880774451032064
The fact that I eschew attempts at falsely stating a homogeneity of interests is why I used unloaded verse.
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-25 11:46:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790882298480717824
Reply addressees: @harrison_partch @SnapPopCrackle
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790880774451032064
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/790880774451032064
PROGRESSIVISM AS INSUFFICIENTLY DOMESTICATED HUMAN
Progressives make moral arguments for what they want, not whether, it’s true, truthful, a self-contradiction, produces consequences, or is even possible, or even vaguely rational. Because Progressives aren’t HUMAN. They’re just undomesticated animals reliant on instinct rather than reason. You cannot domesticate an animal without controlling its breeding over many generations. Until that domestication is accomplished, and people can cooperation by truth, reason, and what we now call science, then they are not domesticated, and they are not, Human. They may be of the Species homo-sapiens, but this is like saying a dog and a wolf are the same species. They are not. Nor are progressives. They are merely undomesticated animals.
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-24 09:00:00 UTC
So, now that I have responded to all your statements made in ignorance, perhaps you will ask rather than assert. 😉 -cheers
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-24 08:23:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790468645784850433
Reply addressees: @SnapPopCrackle
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790428355963162624
IN REPLY TO:
@SnapPopCrackle
What the hell am I reading?!? https://t.co/t3pOC9UWAU
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790428355963162624
Self-evidence requires knowledge of self-evidence. You simply don’t possess it. That said, it requires a lot of knowledge.
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-24 08:12:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790466013397676032
Reply addressees: @SnapPopCrackle
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790438147540721664
IN REPLY TO:
@SnapPopCrackle
@curtdoolittle None of these terms are meaningfully defined. None of these premises are self-evident.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790438147540721664
SCHOOLING THE ARROGANT AND IGNORANT
It took me 15 years. But in its most reductive form, this is the philosophy of western civilization.
–What the hell am I reading?!?Dame Scary of Austin–
Something beyond your pay grade? 😉
—How is violence a freaking resource that can be “invested” in the state?—
How is my labor, my thought, my time, my wealth invested in the state? What about the opportunities I don’t seize? See?
—Your entire worldview is incoherent. How are Natural Law and Market Law in any way related?—
You display an arrogant, ignorant, egoism. You lack knowledge. You are not the judge of coherence in the absence of it.
—None of these terms are meaningfully defined. None of these premises are self-evident.—
Self-evidence requires knowledge of self-evidence. You simply don’t possess it. That said, it requires a lot of knowledge.
—“Acting allows us to obtain the difference between our expenditure and capture of energy.” I can’t even.—
Apparently, physics is included in those things that you dont know. Like life converting molecules and expending waste heat.
–And not only is your philosophy a messy word-salad, but you claim it is the philosophy of Western Civilization. Why?–
All group evolutionary strategies are contained in metaphysical assumptions rather than explicit statements. I state them.
—There IS no “Philosophy of Western Civilization.” You can’t pretend that Plato, Aquinas, Descartes and Nietzche shared views.—
You can however, (of those in particular) demonstrate that they shared uniquely western aristocratic egalitarian assumptions
—Holy shit, are you literally going to murder people when Hillary wins?—
It’s a reasonable solution, although I don’t think it will be necessary. 😉
Propertarianism: the equivalent of reducing all human activity to accounting(operations), profit and loss(incentives), and Balance(results).
—Sounds incredibly limiting.—
Every year, in every civilization, in every era, people invent new ways of stealing, and boycott, violence, and revolt.
In ever civilization in every era, people boycott, enact laws, revolt, or engage in civil war.
Anglo civ is unique: we just update the contract (constitution).
So, now that I have responded to all your statements made in ignorance, perhaps you will ask rather than assert. 😉 -cheers
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-24 04:36:00 UTC
—“Science has developed the art of speaking truthfully over centuries. However, the one truthful proposition that they have avoided is morality. The right of productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer, free of negative externality, is sufficient for a first-principle of all political discourse. The consequence of this single rule, is that political action must be constructed out of exchanges, rather than ‘collective goods.”—CD
(ht Ricky Saini for the reminder)
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-23 04:01:00 UTC
Retweeted scientism (@mr_scientism):
When you’re smart, you can be wrong in really elaborate ways.
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-20 06:49:00 UTC