Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • Murray N Rothbard was a good historian and a great analyst but no, sorry, aprior

    Murray N Rothbard was a good historian and a great analyst but no, sorry, apriorism is a special case, not general rule. (Philosophy was beyond his abilities.)

    —“says…. who?”— (a critic – and a pawn)

    Who speaks the truth, and the reason he speaks the truth, bear no influence upon truth or falsehood.

    Either a proposition survives criticism and remains a truth candidate, or it does not and is false.

    ( I am a not-so-humble philosopher translating the anarchic research program into scientific language.)

    (Because the failure of the liberty movement is reducible in part to its construction as pseudoscience.)

    Political orders, like market goods, and like theories, and like all life must survive competition.

    We can market and produce only those political orders that can survive – esp. the competition for members.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-20 08:41:00 UTC

  • Logic doesn’t tell you what’s true except in those trivial circumstances that id

    Logic doesn’t tell you what’s true except in those trivial circumstances that idiots use to claim logic tells us what’s true. Logic is a form of laundry detergent. We use it to clean our ideas.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-19 05:07:00 UTC

  • If You Could Learn Just One “unknowable” Thing, What Would It Be?

    There are no unknowable things. Only things too costly to know.

    (What idiot flagged this as insincere? This is my job. It’s what I do. It’s the correct answer. Nothing that can be true is unknowable, only too costly for us to know in present circumstances. It’s not rocket science. It’s pretty simple really.)

    https://www.quora.com/If-you-could-learn-just-one-unknowable-thing-what-would-it-be

  • If You Could Learn Just One “unknowable” Thing, What Would It Be?

    There are no unknowable things. Only things too costly to know.

    (What idiot flagged this as insincere? This is my job. It’s what I do. It’s the correct answer. Nothing that can be true is unknowable, only too costly for us to know in present circumstances. It’s not rocket science. It’s pretty simple really.)

    https://www.quora.com/If-you-could-learn-just-one-unknowable-thing-what-would-it-be

  • you could know one unknowable thing, what would it be?– A: There are no unknowa

    https://www.quora.com/If-you-could-know-one-unknowable-thing-what-would-it-be/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=e6fbe264Q:—“If you could know one unknowable thing, what would it be?–

    A: There are no unknowable things. Only things too costly to know.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-18 03:06:00 UTC

  • West evolved truth, jury, common law. Fastest method of adaptation possible

    West evolved truth, jury, common law. Fastest method of adaptation possible.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-17 20:21:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/766007175416340481

    Reply addressees: @FemaBand @ThomasEWoods @lewrockwell @jeffdeist @jtsale

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/766006954569310208

    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/766006954569310208

  • They are too afraid of me. Truth is irrelevant. Personal relationship blinds the

    They are too afraid of me. Truth is irrelevant. Personal relationship blinds them.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-17 19:43:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765997566156742660

    Reply addressees: @FemaBand @ThomasEWoods @lewrockwell @jeffdeist @jtsale

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/765993246824726528

    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/765993246824726528

  • Belief In Libertarian Models Doesn’t Matter, Survival From Competition Does.



    —“Which libertarian model do you believe in?”—

    [R]emember that the way you test a theory is not way finding to justify it but like composing a novel throwing obstacles in front of to see if it can survive.

    It does not matter what we believe. It matters only what order can survive in completion with other orders.

    Libertarians spend a lot of time discussing the best taste, but no one has yet succeeded in baking a libertarian cake.

    There is a reason why libertarians discuss belief and taste and not action and recipe.

    It’s because any attempt to construct the recipe informs the analyst that it cannot result in such a cake.

    Libertarianism like socialism and neoconservatism is just a utopian secular religion and not an institutional model that can survive competition in a market for polities.

    We talk about markets but we do not model our own intellectual product by the same standard.

  • Belief In Libertarian Models Doesn’t Matter, Survival From Competition Does.



    —“Which libertarian model do you believe in?”—

    [R]emember that the way you test a theory is not way finding to justify it but like composing a novel throwing obstacles in front of to see if it can survive.

    It does not matter what we believe. It matters only what order can survive in completion with other orders.

    Libertarians spend a lot of time discussing the best taste, but no one has yet succeeded in baking a libertarian cake.

    There is a reason why libertarians discuss belief and taste and not action and recipe.

    It’s because any attempt to construct the recipe informs the analyst that it cannot result in such a cake.

    Libertarianism like socialism and neoconservatism is just a utopian secular religion and not an institutional model that can survive competition in a market for polities.

    We talk about markets but we do not model our own intellectual product by the same standard.

  • Philosophy: Continental Imaginative Literature(positive) Priests Vs Analytic Critical Law(negative) Judges


    [P]hilosophers function as intellectual police, detectives, judges, and sometimes executioners. Although I have had literary (nonsense) philosophers criticize me for the position, endlessly.

    If philosophy does not consist in the study of how to speak the truth by discovering how we avoid error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudoscience, and deceit, then it is just fiction-writing that conflates religion, literature, and pseudoscience.

    Just as judges may discover general rules (natural law) by solving problems of conflict; and just as physicists discover general rules of determinism by solving problems of extending perception (physical laws); our philosophers discover general rules of reason (rational laws) by solving problems of error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudoscience and deceit.

    Our function is to police the intellectual sphere for error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudoscience, and deceit.

    I am not sure we can classify literary dreamers, hypothesizers, inventors as philosophers. We do. But they give us a bad name.

    This is the correct positioning of the philosophical disciplines. Aspirational Literary Religon and Critical Analytic Law.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Philosophy of Aristocracy
    The Propertarian Institute