Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • The Demand for A Monopoly on Violence

    —“Even a truth by testimony will not defend against a falsehood by sophistry for the emotional and mentally ill equipped. Thus the necessity for the monopoly on violence.”—Brandon Smith

  • The Demand for A Monopoly on Violence

    —“Even a truth by testimony will not defend against a falsehood by sophistry for the emotional and mentally ill equipped. Thus the necessity for the monopoly on violence.”—Brandon Smith

  • “Do You Believe in The Big Bang?”

    —“Do you believe in The Big Bang and other ‘Nihilistic’ science fiction”— a silly person (putting aside the fraudulence of that statement, lol…) I don’t ‘believe’ in anything as you understand that term. I maintain a collection of possibilities that are as yet unsolved, a set I suspect are solved, and a set of things I cannot yet refute. I’m a scientist. My conceptual framework is via-negative (survival) or what you might consider ‘darwinian’. And all knowledge is forever contingent. As I understand it and I think I understand it as well as anyone living, we can describe what we can see, and we cannot describe what we can’t, and there is a lot we can’t, and the remaining problems we can solve in what we see, appear by all accounts to be determined by what we cannot see. Of the known options the idea of collection of bubbles (universes) holds the highest explanatory power, with the least demand for that which violates what we now of geometry. My value judgement of the structure of the universe has no influence over the truth or falsehood of it.

  • “Do You Believe in The Big Bang?”

    —“Do you believe in The Big Bang and other ‘Nihilistic’ science fiction”— a silly person (putting aside the fraudulence of that statement, lol…) I don’t ‘believe’ in anything as you understand that term. I maintain a collection of possibilities that are as yet unsolved, a set I suspect are solved, and a set of things I cannot yet refute. I’m a scientist. My conceptual framework is via-negative (survival) or what you might consider ‘darwinian’. And all knowledge is forever contingent. As I understand it and I think I understand it as well as anyone living, we can describe what we can see, and we cannot describe what we can’t, and there is a lot we can’t, and the remaining problems we can solve in what we see, appear by all accounts to be determined by what we cannot see. Of the known options the idea of collection of bubbles (universes) holds the highest explanatory power, with the least demand for that which violates what we now of geometry. My value judgement of the structure of the universe has no influence over the truth or falsehood of it.

  • Truth Is the Most Intolerant Religion of All

    —“When it comes to theological contests, usually the most intolerant wins – it is not a contest of ideas or even numbers.”—Aaron Kahland  The Law: Transcendence by Sovereignty, Truth, Reciprocity, Markets in Everything. (“The OODA Loop Civilization”) Truth is the most intolerant cult of all. 😉

  • Truth Is the Most Intolerant Religion of All

    —“When it comes to theological contests, usually the most intolerant wins – it is not a contest of ideas or even numbers.”—Aaron Kahland  The Law: Transcendence by Sovereignty, Truth, Reciprocity, Markets in Everything. (“The OODA Loop Civilization”) Truth is the most intolerant cult of all. 😉

  • Truth has no mercy. It slaughters our most cherished lies. Without mercy. And wi

    Truth has no mercy. It slaughters our most cherished lies. Without mercy.

    And without those lies we have no choice but truth and markets.

    And no means of circumventing exchanges.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-09 12:10:00 UTC

  • FIX THE MEANS OF CALCULATION (DECIDABILITY) AND FIX THE PROBLEM You know, I love

    FIX THE MEANS OF CALCULATION (DECIDABILITY) AND FIX THE PROBLEM

    You know, I love my laboring, working, middle class, and upper middle class brothers, because they are by and large a moral bunch.

    But unlike most of them I have spent time with and largely been one of our upper class cousins. And my working class brothers in particular vastly overestimate their understanding of those classes – and just how mentally and emotionally superior they are. Even if they are less … moral … by a long shot. And especially because unlike me, those cousins have abandoned responsibility for using their abilities and positions in the interests of my brothers.

    Most of us who are moral operate heavily by moral intuitions. We cannot imagine that people that have power of any kind have it because it is given to them in exchange for furthering the interests of those who have a portfolio of property in toto.

    They do not sense. They calculate. Because they must. With the right formulae to calculate with they will act very differently. But they are entirely capable of rule once they are limited to the formulae to calculate with that is in the interests of my brothers.

    We have all been under democratic propaganda so long we do not remember the obvious: we are different in ability, and there are a fairly large number who are exceptional in ability in every field.

    The problem is we must restore the relationship between their interests and ours – and we must do it by violent imposition of those rules – those rules of morality we call reciprocity.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-09 11:30:00 UTC

  • IT’S THE TRUTH THAT’S UNKIND You know, for the sake of relationships I try to ke

    IT’S THE TRUTH THAT’S UNKIND

    You know, for the sake of relationships I try to keep quite a bit to myself. That’s why I use distractions of teasing, play, and buffoonery to circumvent many topics.

    And you know, I thought my wife walked on water. You can’t imagine.

    But once in a while things leak out under autistic duress.

    “I am not a life support system for a vagina. Either a marriage is mutually beneficial or it is not. I have to be happy too.”

    I was like — “Wow, was that my outside voice. That stuff is NEVER supposed to come out of the cage….” lol

    Or “Do you always tell your friends that you despise your husband?”

    Or “Did you know a marriage is over once your face shows a disgust response, and it’s only a matter of time?”

    These events were rare. I think my wife and I had two fights during our marriage, and even our agreement to divorce was civil. And even then she said one of them wouldn’t have happened but she misunderstood me. And again, I still think all things considered she walks on water.

    People sometimes think I’m unkind but I think I’m extremely patient and considerate given what generally goes through my mind while their speaking.

    It’s the truth that’s unkind.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-09 10:43:00 UTC

  • Well, moral LAW is objective (Logical and Scientific), moral NORMS are evolved,

    Well, moral LAW is objective (Logical and Scientific), moral NORMS are evolved, and moral PREFERENCES are expression of personal reproductive strategy. The problem is everyone assumes it works the other way ’round.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-08 18:16:00 UTC