Definitions · General Advocacy · Uncategorized

Privilege? Earned Stereotype

—“Privilege is something any group will create for its members if they are able. I think we would do better to ask what’s wrong with groups that are unable, rather than tolerating lectures on account of we trust each other more than we trust them; when they evidently don’t even trust each other (because they would prefer to interact, or do business, or live among, us.)”— Eli Harman

If you, as an individual, find yourself benefitting from the stereotypes developed by your people, is it not ‘true’ and is it not ‘moral’? The more interesting question is why do others not benefit from the stereotypes developed by their people?

Trust, truth telling, and signals of trust and truth telling are very expensive investments a people must make. Why is it that some are more or less willing and able to make those investments and produce that stereotype?

Why should people pay high costs to test a stereotype that was paid for at such high cost? And why have you and yours failed to produce an equally valuable stereotype?

Core · Definitions · General Advocacy · Uncategorized

Q. What is Propertarianism? In A Word: Reciprocity.

Apr 15, 2017 4:32pm
Q: “WHAT IS PROPERTARIANISM?”

What is Propertarianism?
A scientific, meaning descriptive, statement of Natural Law.

What is Natural Law?
A fully decidable (universal) Law of Ethics.

What do you mean by ethics?
The law of cooperation and conflict resolution.

What is this law of cooperation and conflict resolution?
Reciprocity.

WHAT IS RECIPROCITY?

In the Negative (Silver Rule, or via-negativa): The requirement to avoid the imposition of costs on that which others have born costs to obtain an interest in, without imposing costs upon that which others have likewise born costs to obtain an interest in.

In the Positive(Golden Rule, or via-positiva): the requirement that we limit our actions to productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfers, free of the imposition of costs by externality, upon that which others have obtained by the same means.

As determined by the either any change, or the total change in the inventory that all parties both internal and external to the action have born costs to obtain an interest without imposition of costs upon others directly or indirectly by externality.

—“All of ethics can be reduced to [is a subset/special application of] the degree of reciprocity & the the accounting thereof.— James Augustus

WHY DOES RECIPROCITY SERVE AS NATURAL LAW?
Because it is apparently impossible to contradict reciprocity in cooperation (ethics), and as such it provides perfect decidability in all contexts of cooperation at all scales in all times, and under all conditions.

WHERE IS THE NAME PROPERTARIANISM FROM?
Why didn’t we use Natural Law or Reciprocity, or Sovereignty, and why did we use Propertarianism?

We used propertarianism because property, like money, provides the unit of measurement – the test – of changes in state caused by our actions. Property in toto, (that which others have born costs to obtain an interest without imposing costs upon the interests of others) like money, like any standard of measure in any field, provides a perfect test of reciprocity: cooperation.

Natural Law has been ‘tainted’ by various authors, so we had to differentiate ourselves from those previous authors.

Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine

Definitions · Law · Uncategorized

Definition: Law

DEFINITION: LAW (‘inescapable’).

1 – Law: a statement of perpetual continuity (determinism), insured by the forces (organizations) of nature or man(polity, or government).

2 – Law (physical): a statement of perpetual continuity (determinism), discovered by a process of testing(prosecuting) an hypothesis against reality,

3 – Law (Natural): a statement of perpetual continuity (reciprocity) insured by the forces of nature (natural law)

4 – Law (Common): a discovery (finding) of a violation of reciprocity, argued by a plaintiff, defendant, or prosecutor (hypothesis) of the findings of an inquiry by a judge (theory), that survives refutation from other judges (law), insured by a third party insurer of last resort (polity, government).

5 – “Law” (Command) A command issued by the insurer of last resort, insured (enforced) by that insurer of last resort.

6 – “Law” (Legislation): A contract on terms between members of ruling organization, issued by that organization, in its capacity of an insurer of last resort (self insurance).

7 – “Law” (Treaty): An agreement between insurers of last resort, under reciprocal promise of adherence and insurance.

Of these seven, command and legislation are not laws, but enforced as if they were laws. Treaties are uninsurable, because compliance is voluntary, unenforcible, and such agreements are, and always have been regularly violated – unless insure

Definitions · Law · Sequences · Uncategorized

Natural Law

If we define Moral Intuitions as the reactions we feel in response to our thoughts and actions and those of others.

If we define Normative Morality as the reactions we feel given  for methods of decidability given some set of assumptions.

If we define philosophy (positive and literary) as the search for methods of decidability within a domain of preference, and

If we define truth  (negative and descriptive) as the search for methods of decidability across all domains regardless of preference.

Then:

We find that personal moral intuition is the product of our genes, and our experiential development. And it varies greatly from individual to individual.

We find that existing normative morality is the product of evolutionary accident and we learn it through experience and observation – although it does vary a little from individual to individual within groups, and varies widely between groups.

We find that positive or literary philosophy(fiction or philosophy) informs, suggests opportunities, and justifies preferences for the purpose of forming cooperation and alliances between individuals and groups.

We find that negative or juridical philosophy(truth or law) decides, states limits, and discounts preferences, for the purpose of resolving conflicts between individuals and groups.

We find that juridical philosophy attempts to explain the common law, without necessarily succeeding at doing so.  But that the transformation of juridical philosophy to juridical science is eminently possible – we just may not like what we learn, any more than we learned in each previous reformation of our thinking.

Natural Law (propertarianism), is a negative, descriptive, juridical science, not a fictional literature. It is not a rational philosophy limited to internal correspondence. Its not a moral norm. Nor is it necessarily a moral intuition that all would agree to.

It is the record of the arguments by which we decide conflicts over investments we have made, and protect.  And from these records we can identify a very simple single law – non imposition of costs upon anything whatsoever that others have invested in producing whether informational, behavioral, material, or institutional.

And from those observations we may discover general rules. Just as in any other science.

And there is only one of them.

Definitions

Universalism vs Particularism

UNIVERSALISM AND PARTICULARISM ARE STRATEGIES

@Eli
I don’t think universalism has to be ‘taught’. It’s just the rational choice when you are wealthy enough to gamble on the potential to increase the scale of cooperation. Conversely, non-cooperation in a condition of wealth where you forgo opportunities for cooperation is costly. These are evident in all walks of life.

I think universalism arises in periods of empire (colonialism) and declines in periods of contraction – and now that the gains of the enlightenment have been equi-distributed across the world, I think that we are in a period of contraction so that particularism is returning to the ‘natural state’ of man.

I have been looking at history as progressions through economic phases, and the demand for different abilities at each phase and scale and I see a world where calories are of little coast and consequence but VALUE to one another is reduced to zero OTHER than political value. This is what we are ‘intuiting’.

This is a ‘return to normal’ so to speak.

Core · Definitions · Uncategorized

Definition: Fictionalism

Mar 24, 2017 11:43am
DEFINITION: FICTIONALISM
(important for propertarian core)

Fictionalism is the name of the judgement within philosophy, as to which statements that appear to be descriptions of the world should not be construed as such, but should instead be understood as cases of “make believe”, of pretending to treat something as literally true (a “useful fiction”).

Fictionalism consists in at least the following three theses:

1) Claims made within the domain of discourse are taken to be truth-apt; that is, descriptive or fictional, and honest or deceitful, and true or false.

2) The domain of discourse is to be interpreted at face value—not reduced to meaning something else:

  • conversation(bonding or entertainment),
  • discourse (discovery),
  • argument(persuasion), and
  • testimony(reporting),

Differ substantially in the contractual commitments to one another as to the degree of

  • description vs fiction,
  • honesty vs deceit, and
  • truth or falsehood,

Of our statements. (We white and grey lie all time time in conversation, and we do no such thing in testimony.)

3) The purpose of *discourse(discovery)* in any given domain is not truth, but communication. Whether descriptive or fictional, honest or deceptive, true or false.

 

Four common occurrences of fictionalism are:

1) mathematical fictionalism advocated by Hartry Field, which states that talk of numbers and other mathematical objects is nothing more than a verbal convenience for performing their science. (the logic of constant relations: measurement)

2) modal fictionalism developed by Gideon Rosen, which states that possible worlds, regardless of whether they exist or not, may be a part of a useful discourse, and;

3) moral fictionalism in meta-ethics, advocated by Richard Joyce, suggests that fictions (Falsehoods) are too useful to throw out.

4) religious fiction in all areas of thought – our most ancient form of fictionalism.

5) Aesthetic Fictionalism (In the arts, in experience, in the new age, and in the occult)

We must note that all three of these claims are just excuses for doing what has been done in the past.

Of these groups:
0 – Religious Language in toto (supernaturalism)
1 – Literary Philosophers (positive, or advocates ),
2 – Supernormal Physicists, and
3 – Mathematical Platonists;

All attempt to preserve the use of fictions for one of the following possible reasons:

1) To conduct deceptions by claiming their arbitrary preferences or judgements are truths.
2) Obscure their ignorance of causality and decidability in their disciplines, or
3) Preserve the cost of their investments in obscurantist fictional descriptions, or
4) Avoid the costs of investigating the method of decidability within their domains.
5) Avoid the falsification of their arguments if methods of decidability within their domains are discovered.

And so:

If we define philosophy (positive and literary) as the search for methods of decidability within a domain of preference, and

If we define truth  (negative and descriptive) as the search for methods of decidability across all domains regardless of preference.

Then:

We find that positive or literary philosophy(fiction or philosophy) informs, suggests opportunities, and justifies preferences for the purpose of forming cooperation and alliances between individuals and groups.

We find that negative or juridical philosophy(truth or law) decides, states limits, and discounts preferences, for the purpose of resolving conflicts between individuals and groups.

Natural Law (propertarianism), is a negative, descriptive, juridical science, not a fictional literature.

Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine

Definitions · Uncategorized

The Formatting of Posts

THE FORMAT OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF POSTS

1 ==========================

THIS MEANS I WROTE IT FOR YOU TO READ AS AN ARGUMENT
(this cues you to important stuff)

And this is the body text here.

–“this is quoting someone else”–

***this is quoting myself***

… this
… … is a
… … … series that you might want to learn.

2 ===========================

this doesn’t have header so it’s just a record from elsewhere or quick thought or observation, or a work in progress.

3 ===========================

(this doesn’t have a header, is in parenthesis and in all lower case, which means it’s possibly something to ignore … because it’s not an argument.)

4 ===========================

(diary entry)
this is something I wrote for myself that is unfiltered, and likely includes very personal feelings of my own, or on the state of my thinking, and not something that you will probably want to read unless the psychology that I operate under is of some interest to you or other.

===========================

Closing:
I work in public, partly to conduct experiments. I am personally open in public because this prevents people attributing psychological motivations to me that I don’t have. I create conflict in order to run tests. The purpose of running a test is to attempt to create a proof.