Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • TEACHING US TO SPEAK THE TRUTH AGAIN To some degree, we are confused: the scient

    TEACHING US TO SPEAK THE TRUTH AGAIN

    To some degree, we are confused: the scientists developed the method of truthful speech out of necessity AND out of a lack of malincentives. The problem that other disciplines face is that either the externalities produced are somewhat limited, such as the use of mathematical platonism, or the incentives to lie are greater – far greater – than any incentive to tell the truth: such as in politics, law, advertising, the academy in general, or for public intellectuals.

    So what we have done is created an asymmetry of incentives by our incorrect, inappropriate, and morally mistaken advocacy of free speech.

    It is not that we must possess free speech, it is that we are prohibited from bringing a verbal, written, and conceptual product to the market for the consumption of ideas, without requiring that we warranty that good, in an attempt to insure that we do not harm ourselves through excessive warranty.

    However the jury is in on this matter, and instead of spending two centuries defining truthful speech under the limits of law of warranty, we have spent two centuries learning how to improve our lies. And we have, as evidenced by the pseudoscientific efforts of the marxists, and pseudoscientists, and pseudo-rationalists, dramatically improved our ability to lie.

    But since the cause of this continuous improvement of the technology of lying is something we know, and we know how to fix, then there is little stopping us from fixing it.

    All we need to do is return to treating speech as a product and the commons as property, and one may not pollute the commons any more than one may pollute the land.

    It will take very little time, less than two generations, to teach people to speak the truth again.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-02 07:18:00 UTC

  • THE INCENTIVES THAT LIMIT THE ABILITY OF THE ACADEMY TO PRODUCE TRUTHFUL PROPOSI

    THE INCENTIVES THAT LIMIT THE ABILITY OF THE ACADEMY TO PRODUCE TRUTHFUL PROPOSITIONS

    There are categories of problems you cannot solve within the academy. The academy is hostile to many of them. Just as the church was hostile to categories of problems and the ideas that solved them. Just as the state is hostile to categories of problems and the ideas that solved them. In the case of the church and the state, they have adopted the mantra of entrepreneurial class without grasping its limits: we must serve customers, however we may not produce externalities. Both academy and state, which possess international rather than regional scope seek the best customers, whereas church as local franchises sought the best deals on behalf of their investors (consumers).

    This contradiction of incentives was caused by the enlightenment fallacy of the island people (the British – my people) and is why they divorced from the german civilization.

    It was a very profitable means of suicide.

    We cannot look at the anglo value system as ‘good’, we can only look at the anglo empirical methods in philosophy, science, commerce, and law as good. The german method is false,but the values are ‘good’. The cosmopolitan values and method are bad and false.

    CULTURE………..STRATEGY……………..METHOD……..

    British………………False(Suicidal)…………True (ratio-empirical)

    German……………True(Optimum)…………False (rationalism)

    Jewish……………..False(Cancerous)……..False (pseudoscientific)

    The problem is that the germans, once conquered, adopted enough of the British strategy, and the jewish strategy, while they have been occupied in the postwar anglo era, that they are acting suicidally as well.

    The only way to fix this problem is to re-nationalize liberalism.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-02 05:06:00 UTC

  • Ridicule alone is merely an admission of incompetence. Competence followed by ri

    Ridicule alone is merely an admission of incompetence. Competence followed by ridicule will get you hurt, but at least it is not dishonest. Competence without ridicule will not get your hurt, and is honest, and allows you to resort to violence if the other party attempts to disengage via dishonesty, incompetence, or ridicule.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-01 11:36:00 UTC

  • I am, as is anyone, burdened by the necessity of creating universal statements,

    I am, as is anyone, burdened by the necessity of creating universal statements, but that within any universal statement tolerating a distribution. This is necessary for the construction of general rules of communication.

    I have had numerous death threats, and been asked to run for office frequently, and I’ve had people stalk me, and I see nothing special about women with the same problem.

    Women are a dead weight in battle and thats the evidence and the evidence is in – women get men killed.

    The value women provide in any conflict is the provision of supplies, staffing the work force, and providing care taking – and losing their sons.

    But there is no equal to the loss of life and limb. So no, this is a statement that has no merit.

    Nature produces many more males than females for precisely this purpose and under stress females produce more males, and under prosperity more females.

    We evolved this way. Men are where nature experiments and we are disposable. ON the other hand possibly because we know we are disposable, we are highly sensitive to politics – so that we cannot be easily disposed of.

    Women on the other hand evolved to make sure they were safe enough to care for their offspring even if their off spring are harmful to the population (see the stats on mothers defense of serial killers and criminals vs fathers)

    So my point is that we feel what our genes instruct us to feel, and our words are just negotiations.

    The family and one vote per family neutralizez the use of government to conduct war between the genders.

    I think this is one of the insights I have tried to provide. And I will never convince women that their offspring are ugly, stupid, and a terrible additoni to the gene pool, and net drain on humanity. I mean, can you imagine women actually looking at their children that way?

    I cannot imagine not. Women used to expose their children if they could not care for them without self harm. Now they don’t need to expose them, just let others pay for them.

    The cost of this is being paid by men who will now see their old ages in poverty, and loneliness.

    Anyway, that is why men will fight. to the death, or why other men will conquer any group that manages to succeed at the feminist program.

    It’s suicide.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-01 08:09:00 UTC

  • ON PROPERTARIANISM AS A CURE FOR AUTISTIC SPEECH

    ON PROPERTARIANISM AS A CURE FOR AUTISTIC SPEECH

    I use autistic speech myself. I have to work, not to. If I am ill or tired, then forget it. I don’t have a choice. It is a technical description of the relationship between meaning, analogy and grammar just as poetic is. In autistic speech we intuit systematic and often valid relations between concepts, but lack the means to verbally express those relations in normative vocabulary and grammar – and a such we leave these verbal fragments open for deductive association for others; just as we leave them open for deductive association for ourselves, because deductive association is sufficient for us even if we lack vocabulary and grammar. (in other words there is a pretty vast delta between what we consider spatial reasoning or perhaps better said, non-verbal reasoning, and verbal facility or what we call verbal intelligence.)

    Idea generation for me is a trivial exercise. It’s purely intuitive – I fill my mind with information and just let my mind’s obsession with order do its work. In this sense, I don’t really ‘work’ at solving problems. (In fact I have to insulate myself a bit to make sure I am only exposed to so many at a time.)

    But the act of transforming those ideas into normal, rational, and scientific speech is a brutally challenging act of discipline. I can articulate ideas not because it is natural to me, but because I have spent my adult life, actively attempting to retain my autistic intuition while learning how to express that intuition in rational terms.

    Propertarianism solved the problem of autistic speech for me because it is unloaded. ( non normative, descriptive ethics). Propertarianism may be nothing more than the deterministic result of the need for developing a system of speech for articulating highly correspondent phenomenon i causal rather than normative, experiential and allegorical terms.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-01 03:31:00 UTC

  • PRAXEOLOGY CAN BE REPAIRED — AT THE EXPENSE OF THE COSMOPOLITAN PROJECT (worth

    PRAXEOLOGY CAN BE REPAIRED — AT THE EXPENSE OF THE COSMOPOLITAN PROJECT

    (worth repeating)

    Praxeology can be repaired: by restating it as operationalism and testimonial truth. Mises merely failed in his attempt. Because he relied upon rationalism rather than science. And very likely, as did popper, and the rest of the cosmopolitans, because it allowed him to justify preconceptions rather than to discover uncomfortable truths: that the cosmopolitan way of life was systemically immoral, and that western universalism cannot be use as an attempt to preserve separatism.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-31 12:26:00 UTC

  • QUESTION: How can you lie if you don’t know the truth? In order to stop lies, sh

    QUESTION: How can you lie if you don’t know the truth? In order to stop lies, shouldn’t you first learn what they are?

    ANSWER: You can speak truthfully, even if you cannot speak the most parsimonious and therefore ‘ultimate’ truth. It is very hard to load, frame and obscure operational language. So you can warranty your truthful speech but you cannot warranty any theory or deduction is true.

    ht https://www.facebook.com/MartensBenjamin

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-30 20:11:00 UTC

  • CHRIS REARDON ON THE CENTRAL ARGUMENT —“A progressives says says with confiden

    CHRIS REARDON ON THE CENTRAL ARGUMENT

    —“A progressives says says with confidence: ‘…liberals are becoming more liberal while staying very much checked into reality.’ But, can you blame a fish for not knowing it’s in water?” — Chris Reardon

    “A fish knows not that it is in water” – moral blindness.

    “The frog stays in the pot until it boils” – incrementalism and experiential blindness.

    Progressives can have no say in the future of man, since they are morally incapable intellectually incapable of making inter-temporal judgements.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-30 08:59:00 UTC

  • The problem scientists solved with the so called scientific method, was to train

    The problem scientists solved with the so called scientific method, was to train the mind to eliminate imaginary content, so that they could morally testify to the truth of their statements.

    So, scientists needed to compensate … they need ed to tell the truth… As such, what we call the scientific method is not particular to science but to all human utterances. It is either just ‘the method’, or it’s the MORAL METHOD.

    Now, scientists merely make use of a SUBSET of the Moral Method, given that they are both largely unaccountable, and pay no opportunity costs. Mathematicians likewise are unaccountable, and pay no opportunity costs.

    But anyone engaging in the social rather than physical sciences, or in production, or in law, is likewise bound to not engage in adding imaginary content.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-28 03:35:00 UTC

  • “Even if the whole world is telling you to move , plant yourself beside the rive

    –“Even if the whole world is telling you to move , plant yourself beside the river of truth and say, “No. You move.”– Matthew Ross Funk

    Create Wealth. Speak the Truth. Punish the wicked. Never surrender. Show no mercy, give no quarter. Defeat your enemy completely. And if needed, kill them all and let god sort it out.

    Excellence: The True, The Good, The Beautiful.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-28 02:15:00 UTC