Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • Updating Our Ancient Trinity: Truth, Beauty and Morality


    [T]he greeks just couldn’t figure out what they meant by “Goodness”.  But, I have. It’s productivity on the Obverse, and prohibition of free riding on the Reverse.

    It’s do not unto others that you wold not have done unto you: impose no cost is the fee for entry into the fruits of the commons, and heroism: contribution to the commons at self sacrifice, in exchange for status.

    Our ancient indo european ancestors were right all along.

    Contribute to the commons.

    That is the west’s unique evolutionary strategy.

  • Updating Our Ancient Trinity: Truth, Beauty and Morality


    [T]he greeks just couldn’t figure out what they meant by “Goodness”.  But, I have. It’s productivity on the Obverse, and prohibition of free riding on the Reverse.

    It’s do not unto others that you wold not have done unto you: impose no cost is the fee for entry into the fruits of the commons, and heroism: contribution to the commons at self sacrifice, in exchange for status.

    Our ancient indo european ancestors were right all along.

    Contribute to the commons.

    That is the west’s unique evolutionary strategy.

  • TRUTH, BEAUTY, MORALITY The greeks just couldn’t figure out what they meant by “

    TRUTH, BEAUTY, MORALITY

    The greeks just couldn’t figure out what they meant by “Goodness”.

    I have. It’s productivity on the Obverse, and prohibition of free riding on the Reverse. It’s do not unto others that you wold not have done unto you: impose no cost is the fee for entry into the fruits of the commons, and heroism: contribution to the commons at self sacrifice, in exchange for status.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-15 03:19:00 UTC

  • The aim of science is not to open the door to infinite wisdom, but to set a limit

    —The aim of science is not to open the door to infinite wisdom, but to set a limit to infinite error.—

    Bertolt Brecht. Life of Galileo

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-11 00:53:00 UTC

  • The Operational Revolution

    (important piece)

    [O]ne can describe events subjectively (how we feel about them); 
    one can describe them objectively (how we observe others), and;
    one can describe them operationally (by the actions taken).

    One of the most useful methods of overloading, framing, and loading is to describe a process subjectively. Hence why physical scientists write operationally, why mathematics requires the test of intuitionism, and why psychology requires the test of Operationism; and why in economics (cooperation), we write in human actions.

    The chief innovation of the left was to legitimize the pseudoscience of psychology for the purpose of loading, framing, and overloading. Postmodernism and propaganda are the ultimate achievement of the technology of ‘lying’.

    – If we see myth as an attempt to convey truths. We can see monotheism as the organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – if we see reason as an attempt to convey truths. We can see philosophy as the organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – If we see empiricism as an attempt to convey truths, we can see rational philosophy as an organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – If we see the darwinian scientific revolution as an attempt to convey truths, we can see the psueudoscientific revolution as an organized development of lying by loading, framing, and overloading.

    – If we see the logical revolution (analytic philosophY) as an attempt to convey truths, we can see the postmodern revolution as an organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – If we see the (Failed) operational revolution:
    – intuitionism in mathematics 
    – operationalism in physics
    – strict construction in law.
    – operationism in psychology.
    – praxeology in economics.
    – e-prime in language
    – performative truth in philosophy
    we can also see the the development of the academy since its seizure by the left, public intellectuals prior to the conservative 1980 movement, the media prior to the fox news and drudgereport movement, as a means of preventing the completion of the operational revolution.

    We are defending truth but liars compete with us. They compete with us because we tolerate their competition. Lying and parasitism and immorality in all its forms are just thefts from the commons.

    PROPERTARIANISM
    I can fix all of this even if I cannot alone, distribute the technology for defeating liars. The only means of defeat is the common law, the informational commons, universal standing, and the mandate for warranty of all public speech.

    They will simply invent a new method of lying. However, we will have the tools to constrain them for centuries I suspect.

    Curt Doolittle 
    The Propertarian Institute 
    Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Operational Revolution

    (important piece)

    [O]ne can describe events subjectively (how we feel about them); 
    one can describe them objectively (how we observe others), and;
    one can describe them operationally (by the actions taken).

    One of the most useful methods of overloading, framing, and loading is to describe a process subjectively. Hence why physical scientists write operationally, why mathematics requires the test of intuitionism, and why psychology requires the test of Operationism; and why in economics (cooperation), we write in human actions.

    The chief innovation of the left was to legitimize the pseudoscience of psychology for the purpose of loading, framing, and overloading. Postmodernism and propaganda are the ultimate achievement of the technology of ‘lying’.

    – If we see myth as an attempt to convey truths. We can see monotheism as the organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – if we see reason as an attempt to convey truths. We can see philosophy as the organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – If we see empiricism as an attempt to convey truths, we can see rational philosophy as an organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – If we see the darwinian scientific revolution as an attempt to convey truths, we can see the psueudoscientific revolution as an organized development of lying by loading, framing, and overloading.

    – If we see the logical revolution (analytic philosophY) as an attempt to convey truths, we can see the postmodern revolution as an organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – If we see the (Failed) operational revolution:
    – intuitionism in mathematics 
    – operationalism in physics
    – strict construction in law.
    – operationism in psychology.
    – praxeology in economics.
    – e-prime in language
    – performative truth in philosophy
    we can also see the the development of the academy since its seizure by the left, public intellectuals prior to the conservative 1980 movement, the media prior to the fox news and drudgereport movement, as a means of preventing the completion of the operational revolution.

    We are defending truth but liars compete with us. They compete with us because we tolerate their competition. Lying and parasitism and immorality in all its forms are just thefts from the commons.

    PROPERTARIANISM
    I can fix all of this even if I cannot alone, distribute the technology for defeating liars. The only means of defeat is the common law, the informational commons, universal standing, and the mandate for warranty of all public speech.

    They will simply invent a new method of lying. However, we will have the tools to constrain them for centuries I suspect.

    Curt Doolittle 
    The Propertarian Institute 
    Kiev, Ukraine

  • MY JOB AS A PHILOSOPHER. YOUR JOB AS ADVOCATE. Johannes writes: —“…negativit

    MY JOB AS A PHILOSOPHER. YOUR JOB AS ADVOCATE.

    Johannes writes:

    —“…negativity (and negative definitions) are useful only for so long…”—

    Yeah… I get it though.

    I usually say “Arguments against something are not arguments in favor of something.” To act, we need something to act in favor of: a solution.

    **I’m arguing in favor of the positive expression as property rights, of the negative prohibition against parasitism, for the purpose of constructing a post-democratic political order, in which we conduct personal (private) and political (commons) exchanges,, that are mutually desired, mutually productive and free of parasitism. In effect, Im advocating moral government.***

    I just didn’t realize when I started out that I was going to fix a 2500 year old problem in philosophy: what does truth mean, and what is this problem of epistemology? I spent the first part of 2013 trying to figure out if I had to solve these problems or not, and it has taken me two additional years of work to do so.

    My original hypothesis on the structure of moral government hasn’t changed. My ability to articulate the necessity of such a thing, and to defend it has changed. And that is largely due to solving (completing) the failed or incomplete Operational project of the 20th century. And by consequence, gaining an understanding of the vast conspiracy of deceit conducted by the left, and the total failure of the right to develop a scientific statement of its position.

    The reason the right has failed is democracy is predicated on the assumption that all want to join the aristocracy: an equalitarian of aristocracy of everyone. This is demonstrably false. We see that the world cannot bear meritocracy. It only lightly bears truth. And whenever possible people preserve all the cheating that is possible: it is so much easier that providing material value.

    I know what I must do first, and that is a bit of science. I am working on the science. Meaning: the truthful expression of philosophy, including metaphysics, ethics, politics, and aesthetics. One can write popular science only after the science is done. And all science is negative. All true statements are prohibitive. All utilitarian, and therefore theoretical statements are positive. Evolution helped us act, but it did not prepare us for science. As such truth is often counter-intuitive.

    That is one of the revolutions we just went through.

    Anyway. To save the west requires science, solution, advocacy in that order. My job is the science and solution. And everyone else’s job is advocacy.Roman is very adamant. And I’m sticking with his advice.

    Philosophers invent, teachers teach, students implement, everyone else responds.

    I’m doing my job. And i’m doing it with TRANSPARENCY, right out in the open like craftsman on the street – for all who are interested to see.

    Cheers

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-10 05:15:00 UTC

  • THE OPERATIONAL REVOLUTION (important piece) One can describe events subjectivel

    THE OPERATIONAL REVOLUTION

    (important piece)

    One can describe events subjectively (how we feel about them). One can describe them objectively (how we observe others), and one can describe them operationally (by the actions taken).

    One of the methods of overloading, framing, and loading is to describe a process subjectively. Hence why physical scientists write operationally, why mathematics requires the test of intuitionism, and why psychology requires the test of Operationism; and why in economics (cooperation), we write in human actions.

    The chief innovation of the left was to legitimize the pseudoscience of psychology for the purpose of loading, framing, and overloading. Postmodernism and propaganda are the ultimate achievement of the technology of ‘lying’.

    – If we see myth as an attempt to convey truths. We can see monotheism as the organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – if we see reason as an attempt to convey truths. We can see philosophy as the organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – If we see empiricism as an attempt to convey truths, we can see rational philosophy as an organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – If we see the darwinian scientific revolution as an attempt to convey truths, we can see the psueudoscientific revolution as an organized development of lying by loading, framing, and overloading.

    – If we see the logical revolution (analytic philosophY) as an attempt to convey truths, we can see the postmodern revolution as an organized development of lying by loading, framing and overloading.

    – If we see the (Failed) operational revolution:

    – intuitionism in mathematics

    – operationalism in physics

    – strict construction in law.

    – operationism in psychology.

    – praxeology in economics.

    – e-prime in language

    – performative truth in philosophy

    we can also see the the development of the academy since its seizure by the left, public intellectuals prior to the conservative 1980 movement, the media prior to the fox news and drudgereport movement, as a means of preventing the completion of the operational revolution.

    We are defending truth but liars compete with us. They compete with us because we tolerate their competition. Lying and parasitism and immorality in all its forms are just thefts from the commons.

    PROPERTARIANISM

    I can fix all of this even if I cannot alone, distribute the technology for defeating liars. The only means of defeat is the common law, the informational commons, universal standing, and the mandate for warranty of all public speech.

    They will simply invent a new method of lying. However, we will have the tools to constrain them for centuries I suspect.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-10 04:40:00 UTC

  • Conservative EPISTEMOLOGY is one of anti-hubris: a prohibition on consensus buil

    Conservative EPISTEMOLOGY is one of anti-hubris: a prohibition on consensus building, and an emphasis on demonstrated evidence in SOCIAL MATTERS. It is a form of skepticism. Or in critical rationalism, we would say ‘criticism’, and therefore ‘scientific’.

    Progressive EPISTEMOLOGY is one of consensus-building where intentions rather than outcomes matter. It is a form of optimism

    The reason being is that progressivism does not seek truth but to expand numbers regardless of quality, where conservatism seeks truth to minimize their numbers and maximize quality.

    Or, the feminine progressive strategy and the masculine conservative strategy.

    We have no idea what we are doing, we just justify our intuitions. Underneath it is all reproductive instincts and nothing else.

    So conservatives use rational, arational and irrational means to cause us to act scientifically, while progressives use rational, arational, and irrational means to cause us to act unscientifically – as an extended organization wherein each of us has only fragmentary knowledge.

    This is quite profound really.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-09 04:07:00 UTC

  • Is Philosophy Empty?

    [I] can answer this question I think, as well or better than anyone living.  (Despite the obscurant framing of the question.)

    1) Rationalism and justification were dead ends. Theory and criticism have replaced rationalism and justification. We can justify contract, and therefore moral action, but we cannot justify truth. We can construct proofs of internal consistency, but never justification. 

    2) As far as I know the analytic method survives as a form of well-structuring our criticism, but the promise of analytic philosophy was a dead end: it’s entirely tautological.

    3) We can theorize by whatever means we choose, from unstructured free association to formal deduction. But theories must survive criticism. Philosophy remains an exceptional vehicle for theorizing while reducing errors. Therefore as a means of criticism philosophy is not empty.

    4) While, in philosophy, we have constructed: 
    (a) the logic of identity 
    (b) the logic of naming (including counting)
    (c) the logic of ratios (mathematics)
    (d) the logic of causality (physics)
    (e) the logic of language (‘logic as we use it’);

    we failed to complete:
    (f) the logic of existence (operationalism/operatio­nism/intuitionism/action­/e-prime)
    (g) the logic of cooperation (morality)
    (h) the logic of completeness (full accounting)
    (i) that truth must be testimonial (performed), and that all other use of analogy to testimonial truth, is an a subset of testimonial truth, limited to properties of the logic we use for criticism (a thru g).

    As far ask I know (and I work on this problem) can be completed since at present I am fairly confident that the logics of existence and cooperation, and the definition of truth have been solved. This means that philosophy is not empty, just that it took us a very long time to grasp its function as critical: most likely because moral argument is justificationary, and truth and morality are very different things. 

    – Cheers