[I]t is an essay in the amoral (not immoral). We spend so much time in moral mind, we leave ourselves open to defeat. So, he retrains us to think objectively rather than morally. It is not a book about war. It is a book by which we restore agency, lost in the training of our norms.
Theme: Truth
-
We had a prophet. His name was Odin. And he had no want of lies
We had a prophet. His name was Odin. And he had no want of lies.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-02 18:07:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1058420457567854592
-
well, you can sedate yourself with whatever stories you want, but data is data i
well, you can sedate yourself with whatever stories you want, but data is data is data, and the economic and political salvation in this life vs magical salvation after death has been outselling for over a century and the church is all but gone in the west. data data data
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-02 16:57:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1058402766966661120
Reply addressees: @dagmar_schmitt
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1058401721255260160
IN REPLY TO:
@GudistGrug
@curtdoolittle The left-prog-faith is to true religion as a parachute is to an airplane. It is inherently devolutionary in nature. It can only turn this way or that, but never can climb to new levels of civilization.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1058401721255260160
-
“How can I learn to communicate like you do? One cannot effectively communicate
—“How can I learn to communicate like you do? One cannot effectively communicate what is inside without the proper language or outlet to express those things.”— A Friend
I would have to understand you a bit better to know how to answer that. But yes, Propertarianism makes it possible to speak what is in your mind in scientific terms.
I think understanding what I teach requires a great deal of knowledge that unfortunately, we are INTENTIONALLY not taught.
I suppose that when I offer my class this january, that you can join that and I can help teach it to you.
There are a couple of problems learning.
1) learning to think ‘via-negativa’ (in what will make this false) is much harder than how we think today in the ‘via positiva’.
2) learning to describe everything in economic and commercial terms is also somewhat difficult
Because doing both of those requires re-training our ‘intuition’ so that you leave behind the supernatural, and moral ages, and speak in scientific terms of the scientific age.
Then learning WHY that is true, requires learning ‘the grammars of speech’ which i don’t think is TOO hard, and then learning testimonialism (the grammar of falsification).
It’s basically like learning a law degree. But the difference is, that ‘once you see the world this way’ it will all fit together and much more of it will be clear to you.
At that point you will be able to ‘speak what is in your mind’ because you will have the vocabulary for it.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-02 16:47:00 UTC
-
We had a prophet. His name was Odin. And he had no want of lies
We had a prophet. His name was Odin. And he had no want of lies.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-02 14:07:00 UTC
-
ARE YOU A MAN? OR WILL YOU EVER BE? Religion, Demand for Military Service (milit
ARE YOU A MAN? OR WILL YOU EVER BE?
Religion, Demand for Military Service (militia), and the demand to speak the Truth, quite predictably, are the three subjects that people resist the most – and flee from my work the most. The first (religion) requires you to retrain your emotions, which is costly, and the second (warfare) requires you end larping and put skin in the game, which is even more costly, the third (truth) forces you to confront your self worth, and your means of negotiating for your wants and needs – a lower cost, but one we resist bearing.
Most men transcend the adolescent the moment they must manage either family of any size, or others in any size in either commerce or war. (Not in bureaucracy, but only in commerce, and war. Bureaucracy only maintains the illusion of merit, which is why women dominate political bureaucracy and men dominate commercial management ).
Whereas in the past, most of us participated in the market as labor or farmers, a declining number of people both in government, academy, school systems, the medical business, charities, and large enterprises, are no longer participating in the market, and no longer forced out of adolescence into adulthood (manhood).
YOU CAN’T HAVE PERSISTENCE ON THE CHEAP.
You will either pay the cognitive, emotional, and physical costs of saving your people – or you will not, and they will perish.
So leave adolescence behind. Become a man, Pay the costs of the intellectual (natural law), emotional (ethnocentrism), and physical (warfare) or look in the mirror and have the intellectual emotional honesty to say “I am not yet a man, and I never will be, and my people past present and future will pay the price for my cowardice.”
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-02 13:20:00 UTC
-
YES, VIA NEGATIVA REASONING IS THE HARDEST HABIT TO LEARN —“I would say via ne
YES, VIA NEGATIVA REASONING IS THE HARDEST HABIT TO LEARN
—“I would say via negative appears counter-intuitive to most. And that’s part of the problem: reliance on intuition (or counter intuition) for navigation and problem solving”— Micah Pezdirtz
Yes, the via-negativa is the hardest habit to develop.
In economic terms, via-negativa consists of just looking for the equilibrating force, and so it’s all just the application of economic (equilibration) and science (falsification) to what we traditionally treat as moral questions (justification).
It’s so much part of our language, and culture, and literature… and history. It’s just like learning the earth isn’t the center but an irrelevant little bit of dust in the galactic suburbs – and that man isn’t designed just an accident of evolutionary experimentation.
Source date (UTC): 2018-11-02 08:08:00 UTC
-
Metaphysics: We Sense the World Fine.
METAPHYSICS: WE SENSE THE WORLD FINE. WE FILL IN THE BLANKS LESS SO
—“Curt, how do you deal with the âwe canât trust our senses so we have no idea what reality consists ofâ argument? I.e. how can we determine if sensory information is false?”—
[T]here is no evidence that we can’t trust our senses at human scale. So we perceive the world as it exists but at the scale and velocity of our perception. We have to defend against our cognitive biases that evolved at human scale . Or more simply, we SENSE the world just fine. We often PERCEIVE the world with error. We improve our perception with more information. we improve it further with falsification (tests of our cognitive biases). And we use instrumentation to EXTEND those perceptions. So it’s not true that we sense the world incorrectly. We appear to sense it (at human scale) quite accurately, and we tend to perceive it (at human scale) fairly accurately. But we ‘fill in the blanks’ with lots of error. So we have to make sure we aren’t filling in the blanks with error.
-
On Demand for The Sacred
ON DEMAND FOR THE SACRED: EUROPEAN MARKET OR SEMITIC MONOPOLY? 1 – Heidegger=german, which is the point of the discussion. Whether the Truth (knowledge, science, history, heroes, evolution) or Wisdom Literature (parables, fictions, myths) are the basis for civic contract (Monopoly). Or whether a hierarchy of graceful failure from the scientific to the religious is the basis of our civic contract (Market) 2 – The sacred can consist of us, ourselves, can be something else (creatures, anthropomorphic, or formless), can be of things (idols), can be of ideas (of books and words), or of anything that we owe a debt. Although, ideas, things, symbols-proxies for leaders, and ourselves is a very close to complete list of the possibilities. 3 – The sacred serves as a proxy between those who are not good enough to submit to one another. 4 – Religion consists of training (education) the intuition (emotions) so that people ‘feel like’ you do by taking advantage of our pre-cognitive biases. 6 – We can measure increase and decrease demand for ‘the sacred’ (proxies) and I am fairly sure the science of it (like that of status) is simply one that generates denialism. That is to to say that such therapeutic measures are unnecessary, but that they are not explicable.In other words, exposing the content and drive behind the ‘sacred’ makes the sacred impossible, thereby removing which is why it is denied. I 7 – So , to some people the scientific truth is sacred, to some of us (american constitutionalists) the constitution and by proxy ‘we, us, our-way’ is sacred. To some religious tradition is sacred. To some of us a monarchy or leader is sacred. To some of us family, tribe, and nation is sacred. To some of us mankind is sacred. To some of us the transcendence of mankind into the gods we imagine is sacred (that would include me). And to some of us we spread, combine, include, or exclude as suits our interests. 8 – Since debts of submission can be created along those and other axis, the behaviors we want to develop in a polity need only be expressible in all those paradigms – or at least, be sufficiently compatible that group persistence survives competition and shocks. 9 – So the question is, (a) what are those rules of group strategy obscured within and created by some sacred debt, (b) what paradigms within each grammar (system of thought) each system of thought which corresponds to a degree of agency and interests, given our age, class, and accumulated relationships and assets. 10 – it is not … challenging … to understand that the occult is an expression of vulnerability or powerlessness, that ritual an expression of mindfulness, that gatherings are an expression of inclusion, and that festival an expression of trust creation is rather simple. That the narrative content of a mythos allows us categories, relations, and values that can be taught to children (or idiots) which allows graceful (simple) calculation and coordination of cooperation is rather simple. 11 – I don’t do via positiva (religion, philosophy, and literature). I do via negativa law. While we differ in what is preferable and good, and we differ in demand for proportionality, and we differ in demand for liberty (opportunity), we do not differ in demand for reciprocity. Instead, we all seek to preserve our advantageous means of parasitism, predation, deception, and self deception. 12 – philosophy religion and literature (via positiva ) is for others (and frankly, for those who need them). I don’t do either. 13 – It is possible that the clash of civilizations between the german continental and the anglo scandinavian (naval) is simply that the british were smarter, better educated, and more evolved, and the germans, who were the “rednecks” of europe for all of her history, were, and remain a more sentimental people. I just don’t know if that’s an advantage or not. What it appears, is that it’s economically and militarily superior to follow the german model of TRUTH, DUTY, PIETY, AND RECIPROCITY.
-
Metaphysics: We Sense the World Fine.
METAPHYSICS: WE SENSE THE WORLD FINE. WE FILL IN THE BLANKS LESS SO
—“Curt, how do you deal with the âwe canât trust our senses so we have no idea what reality consists ofâ argument? I.e. how can we determine if sensory information is false?”—
[T]here is no evidence that we can’t trust our senses at human scale. So we perceive the world as it exists but at the scale and velocity of our perception. We have to defend against our cognitive biases that evolved at human scale . Or more simply, we SENSE the world just fine. We often PERCEIVE the world with error. We improve our perception with more information. we improve it further with falsification (tests of our cognitive biases). And we use instrumentation to EXTEND those perceptions. So it’s not true that we sense the world incorrectly. We appear to sense it (at human scale) quite accurately, and we tend to perceive it (at human scale) fairly accurately. But we ‘fill in the blanks’ with lots of error. So we have to make sure we aren’t filling in the blanks with error.