Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • An Overview of Propertarianism for Serious Newbies

    Some Introductory Help:

    • On The Use and Meaning Of “-ism’s”.
      https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/02/20/the-definition-and-use-of-isms/
    • The Meaning of Fictionalism
      https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/03/24/definition-fictionalism/
    • Significant Definitions 
      https://propertarianinstitute.com/category/attributes/definitions/
    • Series/Sequences
      https://propertarianinstitute.com/category/attributes/sequences/
    • The Glossary 
      https://propertarianinstitute.com/glossary/
    • The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
      https://plato.stanford.edu/contents.html

    THE UNIQUENESS OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION: TRUTH (AGENCY, SOVEREIGNTY) 1) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/09/17/we-put-the-west-in-western-civilization/ 2) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2014/02/15/on-the-north-sea-peoples/ THE CENTRAL ARGUMENT – THE CONFLICT OF CIVILIZATIONS ACROSS MILLENNIA Part I – The Beginning – Sovereignty, and The Counter Revolution against it. (Bronze Age – Black Sea)

    • The Revolution: The choice of Sovereignty, and as a consequence Agency, Natural Law, Thang (Jury), Testimonial (Deflationary) Truth, and Markets in Everything (Meritocracy).
    • The Counter-Revolution: The Eastern Development of Fictional Scriptural Religion in the Oral Tradition.

    Part II – The Counter Revolution Against Reason and Sovereignty. (Iron Age – Aegean-Mediterranean)

    • The Revolution: The choice of Sovereignty, Agency, Natural Law, Jury, Senate, Testimonial (Deflationary) Truth, Reason, and Markets in Everything.
    • The Counter Revolution: The Eastern (Jewish, Byzantine, Muslim) Development of Fictional, Scriptural, Authoritarian Religion, conflated with Law, in the Written Tradition.

    Part III – The Counter Enlightenment Against Science and Sovereignty. (Steel Age – North Sea-Atlantic) 

    • The Revolution: The choice of Sovereignty, Agency, Natural Law, Jury, Multi-House Government, Testimonial (Deflationary Truth), Reason, Rationalism, and Empiricism, and Markets in Everything.
    • The Counter: Revolution: The Eastern (Jewish, French, Russian) Development of Fictional, Pseudoscientific, Authoritarian Religions.

    The Anglos (Legal Empiricists / Locke-Smith-Hume-Jefferson), French (Literary Moralists / Rousseau) and The Germans (Literary Rationalists / Kant) had attempted to restate their group evolutionary strategy in modern terms. So did the Cosmopolitan Universalist Jews ( Argumentative Fictionalists (pseudo-mythology[authoritarian religion] / pseudo-law/ pseudo-rationalism / pseudoscience / outright-lying)) advocating separatism, poly-ethicalism, fictional utopianism as a universal ‘moral’ strategy. The Cosmopolitan Universalists (Jews) started producing pseudoscience as the enlightenment change rolled across Eastern Europe, (Boaz, Marx, Freud, Frankfurt) primarily as a reaction to the articulation of aristocratic thought in scientific terms (Darwin, Social Science, Spencer, Nietzsche, and the Romanticists.) ( FYI: Marxism: parasitism upon in-group private production. Libertarianism: parasitism upon in-group commons production. Neo-Conservatism: Parasitism upon other nations’  (out-group) private and commons production. ) While the Germansdefended against the enlightenment by rational restatement of hierarchy, duty, and reason in a new literary fashion invented by Kant. The French, Jewish and Russian together attacked the Anglo Enlightenment: the restoration of sovereignty and the attack on Fictionalism which all those nations depended upon. They each responded with a new fictionalism: The French out of feminine idealism and preservation of authority, Jews out of separatism, fear and preservation of authority, and Russians out of opportunity for aggression, restoration of orthodox civilization, usurpation, and preservation of authority – and our Puritans (anglo separatist equivalent of the Jews), and our women (as always) were, frankly, “suckers” for it. Just as they were in the ancient world. The Great Catastrophe  Just as Byzantium overextended herself and lost to the Turks. Just as Persia and Byzantium overextended themselves and lost to Arabs. Just as Rome overextended herself in Europe and lost to Byzantium; Just as Athens overextended herself in Sicily, and lost to Sparta; Just as the Bronze Age civilizations overextended themselves in the eastern mediterranean and lost to the barbarians. Just as all civilizations overextended themselves, Britain, in an effort to preserve the balance of powers from which she profited, constrained Germany, leaving America as her heir. Just as Athenian democratic greed prematurely ended the first industrial revolution (the Antikithera device only one step removed from Babbage’s mechanical computer), leaving pragmatic Rome to rule with Athenian and Carthaginian invention – the British, French, and American democratic (commercial) greed ended the second (this time German) scientific revolution, leaving pragmatic America to rule with German and British inventions. The European civil war to contain Germany was a catastrophe for the West in that it both truncated the completion of the Enlightenment (scientific revolution), whose second phase, and our rescue from eastern mysticism, was in progress in Germany (and from which 19th and 20th century America was the chief beneficiary – not originator.) It cast doubt upon the Western (aristocratic) order just as the thirty years war had cast doubt upon the prior (religious) order. Thereby reversing our prior gains against supernatural utopianism and the restoration of aristocratic (rule of law) rule, and replacing that supernatural utopianism with economic and political utopianism: pseudoscience. Postwar Jews immigrating to the United States used their pseudoscience (see “Pilpul”) and attacked and took over the academy and media just as they had used the pulpit in the ancient era, and the printing press in the prior era, to spread their second great lie of pseudoscience in every field of human social order. Women freed from labor under the industrial revolution used these arguments to reform slavery, seek the vote, and then using the vote, to claim men were their enemies and oppressors rather than their domesticators in a great compromise between the reproductive strategies of women (numbers) – their genes, and those of men (the tribe) – their genes. Once the slaves had been freed, the women also demanded equal representation, and within one generation after obtaining it used ‘the great lies’ of the cosmopolitans to undermine the western order further by creating a century of pseudoscience. They used this pseudoscience to pursue the destruction of the church, the destruction of the family, and the conquest of academy, state and media by women’s interests (r-selection), because women dispose of more of the earned income than do men in all these areas. Women are great consumers and it is profitable to serve them – even when they are spending down five thousand years of accumulated cultural and genetic capital. Women were sold Christianity. Women were sold Cosmopolitanism. Therefore the industrialization of lying found ready consumers. In marketing and advertising, in media and entertainment, and in democratic politics. The insatiable desire of women to consume, preen, signal, nest, care, and redistribute regardless of long term consequences, provided ready ground for the utopian ideology of endless resources provided by endless growth and the end of constraint. The Failure of Western Thinkers Western thinkers (for a variety of reasons) in the 20th century were unable to defeat this pseudoscientific utopian fiction, just as Western thinkers had been unable to defeat the previous age’s supernatural utopian fiction in the ancient world. As Poincare (mathematics) and Friedrich Hayek (economics and law) warned us, the twentieth century would be, and was, regressive in social science, economics, and politics – and it will be remembered as an age of mysticism (actually an age of fictionalism). Even though our progress in Physical Sciences, Chemistry, Engineering, and Information Technology — all products of the truncated German Scientific Revolution – combined with the continued sale of the conquered American continent, combined with the inheritance of the British Empire, combined with the new (now necessary) invention of fiat (stock) money, gave 19th and 20th century America a vast economic boom, which allowed the USA to drag recidivist civilizations (those that adopted the new Jewish Fictionalisms under world communism, socialism, social democracy, and Keynesian non-operational Economics) out of ignorance, poverty, starvation, disease and tyranny. Why? Because democracy in the ancient and modern world was nothing but a lie by which the middle class could take over the government from the aristocracy – and then over-extend growth until the polity developed economic, political, social, and genetic fragility. Our Western habit. One the Chinese did not practice. (If you must expand to grow productivity you are not in fact productive and innovative, but consumptive.) But neither the Western Aristocracy, nor its bourgeoise caste could speak the truth: that man, like plant and other animal, had been domesticated for fun and profit by the imposition of meritocracy by shrinking the reproduction of the lower classes, – and that the differences in the rate of development of civilizations is the result of the shrinking of the underclasses, making possible the progress of the civilization in every possible field of endeavor: linguistic, informational, economic, normative, social, cultural, political, and institutional. The lesson: In the absence of profit through conquest, the most eugenic civilization will always emerge as the most advanced civilization. And this uncomfortable truth is incompatible with unearned (universal) enfranchisement that justifies bourgeoise takeover of government from the aristocracy.PART IV – What Must Be Done? ( The Second Reformation Against Parasitism and Deceit. ) So armed with this knowledge, how do we reverse the century of propaganda, lies, and pseudoscience of the alliance between the Jews, women and minorities, and return the west its lost confidence, and restore the civilization’s strategy of truth+commons? We extend the warranty of due diligence against fraud that we require in products in the market, and services in the market, to cover information in the market, and we restore liability to all participants in a chain of production. We eliminate the economic subsidy for ‘entertainment’ we call copyright. We eliminate financial profiting from the sale of shares of the polity (Fiat Money, or for ordinary people, ‘dollars’ in the form of electronic money), preserving all of the appreciation and interest for the polity (treasury). And we grant universal standing (class action) to defense of the market for information. Eventually, we create separate houses of government for separate classes. And we eliminate representatives and change to direct per-resolution, democracy. This will raise the cost of the various fictionalisms (pseudo-myths/religion, pseudo-rationalisms, pseudo-science, and outright deceit) and eliminate its profitability such that we end the industrialization of lying made possible by mass media. This solution is an incremental advancement upon classical multi-house government in which each class negotiates with other classes for the production of commons, while suppressing the consistent deception (lying) that has been made possible by the industrialization of information distribution (media). By stating in rational and scientific terms the reason for the West’s rapid success in the ancient and modern periods, despite its many disadvantages. Then using this knowledge to defeat this great utopian pseudoscientific lie, even though we failed in the 20th century, and even though we failed in the ancient world against utopian supernaturalism. Our ambition is to require truthful speech in economics, politics, and law, the way we require truthful speech in contract, in the market for goods, and in the market for services. There is no reason that one cannot warranty his speech against the great utopian lies if he is to publish it (sell it, distribute it) in the market for information we call ‘the media’. The West practiced Agency, Sovereignty, Testimony in Deflationary Truth, Natural Law of Cooperation, Markets in Everything, and Aristocratic Egalitarianism (a form of eugenics at scale), and the Militia – and profited from the incremental domestication of the animal man lacking agency, in to the human that possesses it. But this strategy was never written down, only handed down I’m writing it down. Forever. Truth was enough to create the West, and truth is enough to restore the west. THE NORTH SEA PEOPLE AND HANSEATIC CIVILIZATION (MEDITERRANEAN:V3, AGEAN:V2, BLACK SEA:V1) http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2014/02/15/on-the-north-sea-peoples/ A SHORT COURSE IN SOVEREIGNTY AND AGENCY https://propertarianinstitute.com/category/attributes/sovereignty-and-agency/ THE CONSEQUENCES OF SOVEREIGNTY https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/11/27/consequences-of-sovereignty/ A VERY SHORT COURSE IN DECIDABILITY http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/07/30/a-very-short-course-in-decidability/ A SHORT COURSE IN TESTIMONIAL TRUTH http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/06/28/a-short-course-on-propertarianisms-testimonial-truth/ THE DUE DILIGENCE NECESSARY FOR A WARRANTY OF TRUTHFULNESS http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/06/04/due-diligence-necessary-for-the-warranty-of-truthfulness/ A SHORT COURSE IN PROPERTARIAN MORALITY http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/07/27/a-short-course-in-propertarian-morality-2/ A SHORT COURSE IN PROPERTARIAN REASONING http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/09/26/a-short-course-in-propertarian-reasoning/ THE EVOLUTION OF SUPPRESSION VIA COMMON LAW http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/05/10/the-evolution-of-suppression/ A SHORT COURSE IN NATURAL LAW https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/03/29/a-short-course-in-natural-law/ A SHORT COURSE IN ACQUISITIONISM (PSYCHOLOGY) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/03/23/core-acquisitionism-restating-psychology/ A SHORT COURSE IN GROUP ORGANIZATION (SOCIOLOGY) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/03/30/a-short-course-in-sociology-group-cooperation/ ( Still working with this one)THE TRANSACTION COST THEORY OF GOVERNMENT https://propertarianinstitute.com/2016/02/04/a-short-course-in-the-transaction-cost-theory-of-government/ A SHORT COURSE IN MARKET GOVERNMENT (“Perfect Government”, “Markets in Everything”, and sarcastically: “Market Fascism”) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2017/03/30/a-short-course-in-perfect-government/ A SHORT COURSE IN THE WESTERN (ARISTOCRATIC) GROUP EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY ( … ) A SHORT COURSE IN GROUP EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY (COOPERATION/COMPETITION/WAR) ( … ) 1000 WORDS THAT CAPTURE IT ALL http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/05/19/the-most-profound-1000-words-you-can-read-on-political-philosophy-today/ THE CURE FOR PROPAGANDA (LYING) AND WESTERN CIVILIZATION http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/01/18/the-cure-for-propaganda-and-western-civilization/ THE END OF HISTORY IS NOT DEMOCRACY BUT THE TRUTHFUL CIVILIZATION http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/06/06/the-end-of-history-the-truthful-civilization-sorry-francis/ There is much, much more online. But this is enough to keep you (or anyone else for that matter) busy for quite a while. Curt

    MORE – Outline By Chapter (needs updating for 2016 and 2017) [T]he Outline of Propertarianism in posts organized by chapter. This is only useful at this point to scan and get a sense of the structure of the argument. But you’re a smart guy and it might bear glancing. http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/propertarian-posts-by-chapter/ MORE (for 20th c. libertarians)FOR CONTRA MISES: https://www.facebook.com/groups/scientific.praxeology/permalink/750994611656577/ FOR CONTRA ROTHBARD The Minimum Basis for Law (Nomocracy) http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/07/02/propertarianism-vs-rothbardiansm/ Fallacies http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2014/06/20/rendering-rothbardian-fallacies-intellectually-embarrassing-and-argumentatively-impossible/ A Lot More On Rothbard’s Low Trust Ghetto Ethics. http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/?s=ghetto+ethics

  • Criticisms: Admitting Your Own Ignorance

    [I]gnorance isn’t a criticism. (Instead, say “I don’t know that subject”.) Lack of understanding isn’t a criticism. (Instead, say “I don’t understand”.) Difficulty in learning isn’t a criticism. (Instead say “this is hard, so I don’t understand.”) Falsification of meaning isn’t falsification of a central argument is a criticism. (instead say “I don’t think the example supports the theory”) Falsification requires you both understand and can falsify a central argument. (the theory). Like the wise man says: in any technical field people will say “I don’t know”. Btu when we talk of epistemology, ethics, morality, politics and economics, for some reason the average idiot has a vested interest in his nonsense opinion. Now, this is rational because we must make use of epistemology, ethics, morality and politics, while we probably do not need to make use of other disciplines. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t exhausting.

  • Criticisms: Admitting Your Own Ignorance

    [I]gnorance isn’t a criticism. (Instead, say “I don’t know that subject”.) Lack of understanding isn’t a criticism. (Instead, say “I don’t understand”.) Difficulty in learning isn’t a criticism. (Instead say “this is hard, so I don’t understand.”) Falsification of meaning isn’t falsification of a central argument is a criticism. (instead say “I don’t think the example supports the theory”) Falsification requires you both understand and can falsify a central argument. (the theory). Like the wise man says: in any technical field people will say “I don’t know”. Btu when we talk of epistemology, ethics, morality, politics and economics, for some reason the average idiot has a vested interest in his nonsense opinion. Now, this is rational because we must make use of epistemology, ethics, morality and politics, while we probably do not need to make use of other disciplines. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t exhausting.

  • INFORMATION VS KNOWLEDGE VS UNDERSTANDING Some predictions require information (

    INFORMATION VS KNOWLEDGE VS UNDERSTANDING

    Some predictions require information (facts within the context).

    Some predictions require knowledge (of operations and processes)

    Some predictions require understanding (of deterministic relations and limits)

    Most predictions requires all of the above.

    The difficulty of a prediction is the inverse of the information, knowledge and understanding available, times the volatility (limits) in our understanding.

    Taleb’s interesting question is whether we can somehow quantify this ratio.

    Which I intuit is possible but assume we need vastly more precise data than we have today.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-05 10:18:00 UTC

  • Ignorance isn’t a criticism. (Instead, say “I don’t know that subject”.) Lack of

    Ignorance isn’t a criticism.

    (Instead, say “I don’t know that subject”.)

    Lack of understanding isn’t a criticism.

    (Instead, say “I don’t understand”.)

    Difficulty in learning isn’t a criticism.

    (Instead say “this is hard, so I don’t understand.”)

    Falsification of meaning isn’t falsification of a central argument is a criticism.

    (instead say “I don’t think the example supports the theory”)

    Falsification requires you both understand and can falsify a central argument. (the theory).

    Like the wise man says: in any technical field people will say “I don’t know”. Btu when we talk of epistemology, ethics, morality, politics and economics, for some reason the average idiot has a vested interest in his nonsense opinion.

    Now, this is rational because we must make use of epistemology, ethics, morality and politics, while we probably do not need to make use of other disciplines.

    But that doesn’t mean it isn’t exhausting.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-05 08:59:00 UTC

  • Aren’t scientific truth, testimony, promise, trust, contract, jury, common law a

    Aren’t scientific truth, testimony, promise, trust, contract, jury, common law and medicine cultural appropriations? (yes)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-04 12:10:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/683983891955355648

    Reply addressees: @JonHaidt

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/681305231087517697

    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/681305231087517697

  • One of the most evil men? History is written by the artists over the wishes of h

    One of the most evil men? History is written by the artists over the wishes of historians.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-04 11:34:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/683974686846377984

    Reply addressees: @ChuBailiang @FriedrichHayek

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/683972859107016705

    IN REPLY TO:

    @ChuBailiang

    A 37-meter statue of Mao rises in rural Henan (epicenter of his Great Leap Famine) https://t.co/JTdcJeJymq https://t.co/meJgZ9pLvL

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/683972859107016705

  • WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INFORMATION AND STATEMENT? I’m working through Kr

    WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INFORMATION AND STATEMENT?

    I’m working through Kripke again because I know it’s a half truth and I can’t quite put my finger on what’s missing. I know what is wrong with analytic philosophy (sets): their construction destroys information, causation, and operational construction, and therefore existential possibility. I know what’s right with information analysis: marginal difference (cause of change in state).

    So analytic philosophy is a sort of dead end in the sense that language is always informationally incomplete.

    But his understanding of names is correct. Even if his examples are not (the referent Aristotle isn’t identical to the referent Aristotle if he dies at age two and never creates the set of properties Aristotle). We cannot construct the references to the two year old without the reference to the man Aristotle. Therefore operationally, the example cannot exist. I can refer to Aristotle at the age of two, but I cannot refer to a greek two year old with the name of Aristotle. and convey any meaning without the existence of the aforementioned Aristotle as an accomplished adult.

    Meaning does not tell us much about truth – if anything. And the verbalists (analyticals and rationalists) are working with too little information to achieve much. Existence tells us a great deal about truth. Even if other methods tell us a lot about meaning. But even where they tell us about meaning, they tell us nothing about truth. And I think this is the area of confusion, because of hermeneutic conflation. We see this coming out of judaism and christianity and into law, where it did not previously exist. But this conflation of truth and meaning has imposed a catastrophically damaging influence on western thought. And in both the ancient(agrarian), modern(industrial), and current (information) eras, it has constituted a revolt against truth and the undesirability of truth for the parasitic and unproductive classes, peoples, and cultures.

    Meaning is dependent upon the content of one’s mind, and analogy to experience, but has little to no dependence upon truth content.

    Truth is dependent upon reality that is independent of the content and mechanism of of one’s mind – even if it is dependent upon the reduction to analogy to experience so that the mind can grasp it.

    But meaning is required as part of the process of free association. It is useful in obtaining information (hypotheses) that we may pursue and turn into truth candidates. It is useful in the transfer of experiences whether or not those experiences contain truth content. We must construct hypotheses out of concepts we can grasp, and we can only grasp concepts reducible to analogies to experience. So we must accumulate analogies to experience in sufficient number that we are able to run tests for possibility.

    This is one of the reasons for the value of scientific thinking (theories of general rules) since they reduce the informational content we must process in order to identify patterns and test perceptions and information against them.

    My hope (my suspicion) is that truthfulness once practiced like any other set of general rules will have an equally influential impact on human demonstrated intelligence and cooperation as has science.

    My concern is that we have passed peak human and are damaging our gene pool, and that we must reverse our century and a half of dysgenia before the accumulated damage is not correctable through assortative mating.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Lviv Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-04 05:25:00 UTC

  • LETS PUT IT ANOTHER WAY : THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH WE CAN REVOLT. I enter into

    LETS PUT IT ANOTHER WAY : THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH WE CAN REVOLT.

    I enter into debate with others by forgoing my violence in order to use truth and reason to negotiate mutually beneficial terms.

    I enter into a polity by forgoing my violence in order that the government may make use of it to negotiate mutually beneficial terms on my behalf.

    I enter into debate and into the polity entirely for the purpose of cooperation, and gaining the results of cooperation, on behalf of me, my offspring, my family and my kin.

    If any condition arises where the government does not limit itself to the use of truth and reason;

    Or in any condition where the government does not use my forgone violence in order to negotiate mutually beneficial terms on my behalf;

    Or in any condition where the government does not assist me in cooperation on behalf of myself, my offspring, my family, and my kin;

    Then the government has broken the three rational reasons by which I forgo my violence in favor of exploration of opportunity, improvement of my lot, and the improvement the lot of my kin;

    And the only rational course of action is to cease to forgo the use of my violence and use my wealth of violence, whatever that may be;

    To demand truth and reason.

    To demand action upon my behalf.

    To demand action on behalf of my kin.

    The moment an individual in government lies, that is the moment the rational contract for cooperation is broken, and that I must out of interest to myself and my kin and all those generations that have been and may follow, to overthrow that government and impose one on my behalf, and my kin’s behalf, for history and eternity.

    Leave, Repent or Die.

    But we shall no longer tolerate your lies.

    Your conquest.

    Your genocide.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-04 04:12:00 UTC

  • —“When we turn to political and international thinking, we are further from stra

    —“When we turn to political and international thinking, we are further from straight scientific thinking. Such words as: ‘progress’, ‘liberty’, ‘democracy’, ‘fascist’, ‘reactionary’, ‘racist’, ‘liberal’, and many other are used in political thinking and communication in such a way that they carry more of emotional then of factual meaning. So long as words so used are the ordinary terms of rival politicians, how can we hope to think straight in national and international affairs?

    We must look forward to the day when the thinking about political and international affairs will be as unemotional and as scientific as that about the properties of numbers or the atopic weights of elements. The spirit of impartial investigation of facts unswayed by irrelevant emotions has given us great advances in the sciences. It’s triumphs will be even greater when it is applied to the important affairs of life. We shall be able to discuss and settle such questions a public v private ownership, control of atomic weapons, and disarmament treaties as successfully as physicists have discussed and settled Einstein’s theory of relativity.”— Robert Thouless, Straight and Crooked Thinking p22-23

    (We have it. That does not mean people will appreciate Propertarianism and Testimonial Truth any more than they appreciated Darwin.)

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-03 10:09:00 UTC