Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • Q&A: “CURT, WHAT ARE THE LIMITS OF EMPIRICISM?” —“How far can empiricism go? C

    Q&A: “CURT, WHAT ARE THE LIMITS OF EMPIRICISM?”

    —“How far can empiricism go? Can it only go so far, telling us how we can construct our government so that it will work? Can it only be mostly right at best?”—

    You’re thinking like a justificationist. Empiricism is a method of testing the survival of an idea. Same with identity, logic, and operational description. It’s not that empiricism or logic is superior, its that if anything survives all those tests of identity, logical consistency, empirical consistency, operational possibility, it just has a pretty good chance of being true. Conversely, if it doesn’t survive all those tests, it’s got a good chance of being error or deception.

    We can construct government with the people we have, and eliminate the people that harm our ability form a government that allows us to successfully compete against alternative tribes and governments.

    But we cannot construct a government that consists of (a) people we do not have, and (b) assumptions of what men can know that they demonstrably cant, and (c) assumptions of shared interest, and (b) assumptions of beliefs counter to the evidence produced by our investigations.

    In this sense TRUTH can take us a very great distance. If we understand science is merely the craft of discovering truthfulness, by the process of eliminating falseness, then science can take us a very great distance. As for empiricism, it has been more successful than reason and rationalism in assisting us in practicing the craft of science in the pursuit of truth.

    Why? Because the universe does not err or lie. We are part of it and must act within it. We can change it by bending it to our will. But to do so we must understand it. And to eliminate error and deceit, we must understand man. For error and deceit are properties of man not the universe.

    And it is these properties of man we must eradicate if we wish to transform into the gods we seek.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-06 04:20:00 UTC

  • LITERARY PHILOSOPHY IS FICTION It’s probably about time to classify Continental

    LITERARY PHILOSOPHY IS FICTION

    It’s probably about time to classify Continental Philosophy as little more than a bridge between historical and fictional literature.

    – operational documentation,

    – descriptive historical literature,

    – propositional philosophical literature,

    – authoritarian psudoscientific literature

    – authoritarian supernatural mythical literature

    – escapist fanciful fictional literature,

    – parable

    – poetry

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-05 07:18:00 UTC

  • Q&A: WHO DECIDES TRUTH? MARKETS DECIDE EVERYTHING —“Under Propertarianism, if

    Q&A: WHO DECIDES TRUTH? MARKETS DECIDE EVERYTHING

    —“Under Propertarianism, if we require due diligence in public speech, then who decides what’s true enough to say?”—Sol Hamer

    Good question.

    Who decides what product is harmless enough to ship?

    You do, provided you can bear the potential damages. If not, your insurer, who decides if it can bear the potential damages. If not, your insurer of last resort, who decides if it can bear the potential damages.

    The market for retaliation against harm determines if you were right.

    We cannot logically require people speak the truth. We can, however, require in public speech, just as we require in all things brought to market, or placed into the commons, that you have done due diligence against error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, pseudoscience and deceit – as well as fraud.

    Yes, it is not easy today for average people to speak truthfully – they have intentionally by the left, been taught to lie, to repeat lies, and to believe lies.

    And yes, people intuitively react against this constraint, just as they have reacted against the evolution of private property, competition, and meritocracy in all forms. But we have built the high trust, high economic velocity, western world through the incremental suppression of all forms of externalization of costs, by forcing individuals to bear the costs of their actions.

    And the technology we have used to incrementally suppress parasitism and the externalization of costs is the common judge discovered law, and the market for retaliation that is provided by the courts.

    I remain confident that the increase in trust and prosperity and our civilization’s competitive advantage will be as great or greater than the rational and empirical revolutions – both the products of our creation.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-05 04:18:00 UTC

  • It is not something I can tweet, but testimonialism provides a series of tests t

    It is not something I can tweet, but testimonialism provides a series of tests that if followed make it very difficult to lie.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-04 18:58:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761275211744436224

    Reply addressees: @mightyboom_

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761274749620150272

    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/761274749620150272

  • Honest fools respond like honest people upon discovering an error in their reaso

    Honest fools respond like honest people upon discovering an error in their reasoning. Dishonest people retreat into emotion.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-04 17:42:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761256029518725123

    Reply addressees: @hostempopuli

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761255740266905600

    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/761255740266905600

  • This is an extreme form of argument that will almost always assist you in learni

    This is an extreme form of argument that will almost always assist you in learning how to identify frauds.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-04 17:41:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761255803982639104

    Reply addressees: @hostempopuli

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761253827744034816

    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/761253827744034816

  • So the first act of fraud is framing an argument around an untestable propositio

    So the first act of fraud is framing an argument around an untestable proposition. This is called ‘distraction’. It’s deceit.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-04 17:37:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761254834557296640

    Reply addressees: @hostempopuli

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761253827744034816

    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/761253827744034816

  • We couldn’t require truthful speech in the commons, because we didn’t know how t

    We couldn’t require truthful speech in the commons, because we didn’t know how to test for it. Now we do: Testimonialism. Ergo:No more lies.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-04 17:30:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761253043266609154

  • Cultural Marxism, or more commonly “Political Correctness” only exists because w

    Cultural Marxism, or more commonly “Political Correctness” only exists because we allow ALL rather than just TRUE speech. We don’t have to.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-04 17:29:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761252690949201920

  • People don’t need to put skin-in-the-game voluntarily. We can require Testimonia

    People don’t need to put skin-in-the-game voluntarily. We can require Testimonial Truth for all public speech: an involuntary warranty.#tcot

    Source date (UTC): 2016-08-04 17:27:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/761252203885649920