thoughts of an ultra high IQ guy

[Karl]

I choose the immorality which is more humane than the phony morality of things such as they stand. Who am I to decide about the appropriate use of force? I am me. You are you, and you abdicated that choice, naievely thinking that retreat is a viable option .

 

There is only one appropriate use of force and that is to protect yourself from attack. It is a zero sum action. Violence produces no good at all.

 

If you decide that you must initiate force then you must do so consistently. If you are consuming, then you must apply that force to yourself as that is how you judge value. If thy eye offends you pluck it out.

[Stosh]

Whats with the commandments ? Besides, Force isnt how I judge value, its how one overcomes obstacles that dont happen to fall out fortuitously as I want them to. My eye doesnt offend me so much as what they see, sometimes, its Far better to force your hand to obey , than me to pluck out my own eye, thats for certain!

If your going to get all christian on me, may I remind you that God killed almost everything on earth once , threatens with hell and misfortune the disobedient.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Stosh

[Stosh]

Its really pretty simple Karl, all you have to do, is willingly obey me. Then you can keep your hands clean, not need to pluck out your eye, and I wont need to force you. , But should you choose to stand up to me, then you need to poke out your own eyes.

[MooNiNite]

True, but thats kinda hard to measure at all

 

Theoretically masters can feel it, or even see it.. Iv heard Buddha could see how evolved a person was by looking at their energy system. 

[Karl]

Whats with the commandments ? Besides, Force isnt how I judge value, its how one overcomes obstacles that dont happen to fall out fortuitously as I want them to. My eye doesnt offend me so much as what they see, sometimes, its Far better to force your hand to obey , than me to pluck out my own eye, thats for certain!

If your going to get all christian on me, may I remind you that God killed almost everything on earth once , threatens with hell and misfortune the disobedient.

 

As I'm sure you realise, you are using an equivocation. The initiation of force against another person is not the same as forcing your hand to obey your brain.

 

If you hold your life as a value against which you judge other values, then to initiate the use of force against another person is irrational. All men must equally have the freedom to pursue their own survival as you do if you are to be consistent with your values. Once you become inconsistent, whimsical or arbitrary, then you lose consistency. Thus you threaten your own survival.

 

In objectivist philosophy these things do matter. To evade and rationalise inconsistent thought creates internal conflicts which produce disharmony. It means you build a hierarchy of knowledge which is built on shifting sand. The result is that you add to the problems that you want to eradicate.

 

The answer to the most effective use of resource is Laissez Faire Capitalism and not more government control which created the problem in the first place. If the initiation of force makes things worse, then it's hardly plausible to believe a greater initiation of force will improve it.

[Stosh]

Theoretically masters can feel it, or even see it.. Iv heard Buddha could see how evolved a person was by looking at their energy system. 

I guestimate that Gautama was probably quite exceptional, but I know even less that his teachings have survived understood. Hed have to litterally show up at my door and convince me of certain things. Id be willing to listen. Until then ,the rest of us need some kind of viable method that we believe. I and anyone else ,are limited by what we can afford to entertain, if info just totally destroys our worldview, we are devastated, so we fight to not have that happen.... daily.

[Stosh]

Karl, I thought I was just trying to push your buttons ,so that the reflexive gut check, confirmed that the noninterference directive doesnt work unless all agree. And we just dont. as soon as you set moral standards for society ,compulsion becomes mandatory.

Laissez faire Capitalism had its day, just as the hippie generation did, but the cold facts were that unrestricted behavior has societal and personal drawbacks.

We live in a world where forces are everywhere, and have only the freedom that leash affords. The bar requires a bouncer or worse situations would follow. Tiny groups of people may embrace a code ,and be harmonious,, just not whole societies. Confucian by day Taoist by night.... Give me a big enough lever and a place to stand,, and I will move the earth.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Stosh

[ralis]

Karl, I thought I was just trying to push your buttons ,so that the reflexive gut check, confirmed that the noninterference directive doesnt work unless all agree. And we just dont. as soon as you set moral standards for society ,compulsion becomes mandatory.

Laissez faire Capitalism had its day, just as the hippie generation did, but the cold facts were that unrestricted behavior has societal and personal drawbacks.

We live in a world where forces are everywhere, and have only the freedom that leash affords. The bar requires a bouncer or worse situations would follow. Tiny groups of people may embrace a code ,and be harmonious,, just not whole societies. Confucian by day Taoist by night.... Give me a big enough lever and a place to stand,, and I will move the earth.

 

I agree, in that society is a complex structure with individuals and groups vying for basic needs all the way to imperialist ideology. A society would never function without rules that apply equally to all. Unfortunately, money rules and the acquisition of is creating a neo-feudalist society. Corporate fascism to be more precise.

Edited March 27, 2016 by ralis

[MooNiNite]

I guestimate that Gautama was probably quite exceptional, but I know even less that his teachings have survived understood. Hed have to litterally show up at my door and convince me of certain things. Id be willing to listen. Until then ,the rest of us need some kind of viable method that we believe. I and anyone else ,are limited by what we can afford to entertain, if info just totally destroys our worldview, we are devastated, so we fight to not have that happen.... daily.

A lot of masters talk about being able to sense power level. That could be a way to judge intelligence. 

[Karl]

Karl, I thought I was just trying to push your buttons ,so that the reflexive gut check, confirmed that the noninterference directive doesnt work unless all agree. And we just dont. as soon as you set moral standards for society ,compulsion becomes mandatory.

Laissez faire Capitalism had its day, just as the hippie generation did, but the cold facts were that unrestricted behavior has societal and personal drawbacks.

We live in a world where forces are everywhere, and have only the freedom that leash affords. The bar requires a bouncer or worse situations would follow. Tiny groups of people may embrace a code ,and be harmonious,, just not whole societies. Confucian by day Taoist by night.... Give me a big enough lever and a place to stand,, and I will move the earth.

 

You cannot set 'moral standards' you can only set rules under which men have freedom of choice. Like you said. The bar has a bouncer. The rules are clear to follow. It's a private establishment and people enter it knowing what the rules are. That's exactly how Lassez Faire capitalism works-and it's the only type which does.

 

The participants have internal rules and external laws. The use of violent force is reserved for use by an objective body. Internally there are contracts, trade bodies, lawyers, courts, insurers. Most conflicts can be resolved without requiring the government to intervene. It's only when things turn violent that external arbitration is required.

 

It's really very simple and people get how to do this. There are always cheats, but these people are taken care of within the market. Murderers, robbers and rapists are dealt with by the Government.

 

As soon as people want government control of the market, out come the regulators, regulatory capture, lobbyists, bribery, corruption and a complete collapse of justice. That's what we are witnessing now, be it the military industrial complex, banking, big pharma, big Agra. The effect is always the opposite for reasons I have already outlined.

 

 

[Stosh]

A lot of masters talk about being able to sense power level. That could be a way to judge intelligence. 

I dont what any of that is saying though. What power, what masters and what are they considering intelligence. All you say might be true, but even if it is, I dont know that the chosen ones would suit the challenge, or suit it in a way I approve of , or if they might even decide to mind their own business.

[Stosh]

Its sounding a bit like a vision of Utopia, I agee ,ideally speaking, a lot of that would make sense and be nice,, Im just saying that as things stand, force is the only means we know of to set that up, and force will still be required to maintain it unless every single person is on the same page. And we havent even addressed the mentally ill.

[ralis]

Its sounding a bit like a vision of Utopia, I agee ,ideally speaking, a lot of that would make sense and be nice,, Im just saying that as things stand, force is the only means we know of to set that up, and force will still be required to maintain it unless every single person is on the same page. And we havent even addressed the mentally ill.

 

The only way Laissez Faire Capitalism works is in a small group with no outsiders where everyone is in a close relationship.

[Karl]

Its sounding a bit like a vision of Utopia, I agee ,ideally speaking, a lot of that would make sense and be nice,, Im just saying that as things stand, force is the only means we know of to set that up, and force will still be required to maintain it unless every single person is on the same page. And we havent even addressed the mentally ill.

 

It is what it is, not utopia. Laissez Faire and force are incompatible. Everyone won't be 'on the same page' they either choose to be good actors, or they find themselves as outsiders unable to obtain anything and hence survive. They either become part and realise their mistake by working harder to try and regain trust or they resort to robbery and theft. In the case of the latter, eventually the law will deal with them and justice will be done. The free market can never be perfect, only the foolish try to make it so. The point of a free market is that it increases production, innovation and wealth over one which a group try and control. That should be obvious, but no matter what history shows and facts bare out, people continue to demand the application of force. One day they get a Mao, Hitler or Stalin-they get their hearts desire in spades.

 

 

[Karl]

The only way Laissez Faire Capitalism works is in a small group with no outsiders where everyone is in a close relationship.

 

That's Laissez Faire. People trade with people by building trust between them. The market is an enormous network of small groups regularly trading with each other after developing trust from each trade. Bad actors don't make trusted traders and are soon discarded.

[Stosh]

Karl, Evicting people or withholding stuff are still means of force ,as is the use of police.

Did the big railroad barons succeed by being fair traders ,or exploitative? how about slavers ,slum lords and drug barons? Union bosses mobsters terrorists and corrupt officials ?

There needs to be oversight for the public welfare ,and the use of just force for the majority to prosper.

 

[Karl]

The thing I do find interesting about some of the theories Lanagan has written about is that they parallel the ideas of Ayn Rand in her later years. She speaks of the mathematics as the method of cognition had begun to study higher maths in order to work on the idea. She thought that eventually a link would be established.

 

Rand:

The basic principle of concept-formation (which states that the omitted measurements must exist in some quantity, but may exist in any quantity)is the equivalent of the basic principle of algebra, which states algebraic symbols must be given some numerical value, but may be given any value. In this sense and respect, perceptual awareness is the arithmetic, but conceptual awareness is the algebra of cognition.

 

The relationship of concepts to their constituent particulars is the same as the relationship of algebraic symbols to numbers. In the equation 2a=a+a any number may be substituted for a without affecting the truth of the equation. In the same manner, by the same psycho-empistomological method , a concept is used as an algebraic symbol that stands for any of the arithmetical sequence of units it subsumed.

 

Peikoff: what the window of mathematics reveals is not the mechanics of deduction , but of induction. It is not the barren constructs of rationalistic, but mans method of extrapolating from observed data to the total of the universe.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Karl

[Karl]

Karl, Evicting people or withholding stuff are still means of force ,as is the use of police.

Did the big railroad barons succeed by being fair traders ,or exploitative? how about slavers ,slum lords and drug barons? Union bosses mobsters terrorists and corrupt officials ?

There needs to be oversight for the public welfare ,and the use of just force for the majority to prosper.

Initiation of force, not that force isn't required. There is a distinct difference.

 

It is the 'oversight' that allowed, legalised and protected slavery and rail road barons. Drug barons (if you mean the current illegal kind) are created by the Government making drug sales illegal (stopping Laissez Faire capitalism from working). I could go on but don't want to snarl up the thread more than necessary.

 

The only oversight needed is an objective government that prevents the initiation of force and has no other part in the affairs of men beyond protecting their peaceful liberty. It acts in the case of others who use force to gain that to which they have no rights and dispense justice through binding laws.

Edited March 27, 2016 by Karl

[Stosh]

Theres no such thing as objective government, which is made of biased people,, nor actual liberty for that matter,since we live in a finite amd constrained situation , nor does forceless prevention of the initialization of force work universally ,because reward for negative behavior encourages the undesirable behavior rather than satisfy it. So you will always see force initiated, the issue becomes whether one feels force justified or not , thats a Moral decision. Drop the morality, justification disappears, and there is only that which occurs ,to stir the pot. Negotiation can happen , The people could benefit a hundredfold.

Its just not human nature to those socialized as we are, to A , dispense with justifications ,,B abandon our individual self concern for the good of society all the time. It only works on small scale, in tight knit groups that highly value all the other members.

You can have the last word if you want. I can leave off there.

[Karl]

Theres no such thing as objective government, which is made of biased people,, nor actual liberty for that matter,since we live in a finite amd constrained situation , nor does forceless prevention of the initialization of force work universally ,because reward for negative behavior encourages the undesirable behavior rather than satisfy it. So you will always see force initiated, the issue becomes whether one feels force justified or not , thats a Moral decision. Drop the morality, justification disappears, and there is only that which occurs ,to stir the pot. Negotiation can happen , The people could benefit a hundredfold.

Its just not human nature to those socialized as we are, to A , dispense with justifications ,,B abandon our individual self concern for the good of society all the time. It only works on small scale, in tight knit groups that highly value all the other members.

You can have the last word if you want. I can leave off there.

 

Government doesn't exist in a vacuum. It exists only by the support of the people. It is not easy to have objective Government, but it's possible. One of the key issues I came across in Libertarian circles being that if we couldn't have objective Government, then we shouldn't have ANY government. This seemed logical and pointed to Anarchy being the way forward, but, something didn't quite work and I discovered that it was because libertarians didn't operate from a philosophy, but continued to be subjectivists.

 

What I'm proposing, or what Rand proposed was not something that will happen overnight, or either in several generations. It is on the scale of the enlightenment but far more permanent. It won't happen in my lifetime unless there are really miracles :-), but it will have to come or we will either revert to barbarism or vanish completely. These are the options. I like to think of myself as one tiny grain of sand around which, in time, others might gather. It requires a change in thinking by a change in current philosophy. I see objectivism as the only way forward otherwise any change will be fruitless.

 

Perhaps one day we will have a GORT......GOveRnmenT which is incorruptible and impartial and objective just like the robot in the film 'the day the Earth stood still". Maybe we can expand our consciousness sufficiently to emerge from our current darkness. Maybe it will take a catastrophe, maybe sufficient people will realise.

[Geof Nanto]

Government doesn't exist in a vacuum. It exists only by the support of the people. It is not easy to have objective Government, but it's possible. One of the key issues I came across in Libertarian circles being that if we couldn't have objective Government, then we shouldn't have ANY government. This seemed logical and pointed to Anarchy being the way forward, but, something didn't quite work and I discovered that it was because libertarians didn't operate from a philosophy, but continued to be subjectivists. What I'm proposing, or what Rand proposed was not something that will happen overnight, or either in several generations. It is on the scale of the enlightenment but far more permanent. It won't happen in my lifetime unless there are really miracles :-), but it will have to come or we will either revert to barbarism or vanish completely. These are the options. I like to think of myself as one tiny grain of sand around which, in time, others might gather. It requires a change in thinking by a change in current philosophy. I see objectivism as the only way forward otherwise any change will be fruitless. Perhaps one day we will have a GORT......GOveRnmenT which is incorruptible and impartial and objective just like the robot in the film 'the day the Earth stood still". Maybe we can expand our consciousness sufficiently to emerge from our current darkness. Maybe it will take a catastrophe, maybe sufficient people will realise.

 

For a systems-environment perspective on this see......

 

http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/38675-language-we-trick-ourselves-with/?p=631361

[ralis]

Government doesn't exist in a vacuum. It exists only by the support of the people. It is not easy to have objective Government, but it's possible. One of the key issues I came across in Libertarian circles being that if we couldn't have objective Government, then we shouldn't have ANY government. This seemed logical and pointed to Anarchy being the way forward, but, something didn't quite work and I discovered that it was because libertarians didn't operate from a philosophy, but continued to be subjectivists. What I'm proposing, or what Rand proposed was not something that will happen overnight, or either in several generations. It is on the scale of the enlightenment but far more permanent. It won't happen in my lifetime unless there are really miracles :-), but it will have to come or we will either revert to barbarism or vanish completely. These are the options. I like to think of myself as one tiny grain of sand around which, in time, others might gather. It requires a change in thinking by a change in current philosophy. I see objectivism as the only way forward otherwise any change will be fruitless. Perhaps one day we will have a GORT......GOveRnmenT which is incorruptible and impartial and objective just like the robot in the film 'the day the Earth stood still". Maybe we can expand our consciousness sufficiently to emerge from our current darkness. Maybe it will take a catastrophe, maybe sufficient people will realise.

 

Dream on. It will never happen.

[Karl]

Dream on. It will never happen.

 

Probably not, but makes no difference to me. I've been told 'it can't be done' all my life-then I did it and everyone said they never doubted it for a moment- funny that. ;-)

[ralis]

Probably not, but makes no difference to me. I've been told 'it can't be done' all my life-then I did it and everyone said they never doubted it for a moment- funny that. ;-)

 

You did what?

[aboo]

I enjoyed the video Wells, thanks for sharing. I haven't read enough about Christopher Michael Langan and CTMU to form an opinion yet, but I have to say it seems a shame that this man's talents have apparently gone to waste - working manual jobs etc. It would be great to see him working at one of the top scientist institutions (MIT etc) and being put through his paces.

Edited March 28, 2016 by aboo