The Natural Law Institute

(scrap) Article II.II Rights, Obligations and Inalienations Under Natural Law (Federal)

PROBLEM STATEMENT HERE ( … )

How does the individual know how to apply the natural law in all aspects of life?


the minium rules of contextual decidabiilty for responsible sovereign actors.
So this is the basic system of weights and measures for the preservation of self determinaton by self determined means by sovereignty and reciprocity.

OUTLINE

  • Explanation (weights and measures)
  • Definitions of Rights Obligations and Inalienations (ROIs)
  • Spectrum of ROIs
  • The Necessity of Articulating and Enumerating ROIs
  • The Causal Origin of ROIs
  • The Causal Relationship between ROIs
  • The Strict Construction of ROIs
  • Enumerating the Natural, Necessary, Fundamental, ROIs
    • Index of Section
  • 4 – Immutability of Fundamental, Natural, Rights
  • 4- Disambiguate Negative and Natural from Positive and Contractual
  • 4- Disambiguate Rights by Enumerating Differences Between The Spectrum of Necessary to Arbitrary Rights.
  • Limits
    • 4- Variation from Negativa Natural Rights by Positiva Contractual and Legislative
    • 4– Variation in Rights By Conditions: All rights are conditional given the three states of a polity
    • 4- Variation by Duty to the Priority of Obligations, Rights, and Inalienations under Trifunctionalism:

A SYSTEM OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

( … )

DEFINITIONS

(note:  DECISION on Definitions: (a) reference the original defintion for brevity (b) repeat the definition for readability, (c) repeat and reference the definition for testability.)

Natural Necessary Negative Rights vs Contractual Utilitarian Positive Rights:

Natural rights obligations and inalienations are necessary for the production of the insurance of sovereignty in demonstrated interests for all insurers and their dependents in the polity.

Contractual rights are those of utility produced by legislative contract 

|Rights|: Natural > Conditional(ability) > Contractual(contingent)

Right: A claim on community of insurers for defense of one’s demonstrated interests.

Obligation: A claim by the community of insurerers for all insured to defend their demonstrated interests.

Inalienation: A demand by the community of insurers  that prohibits all insured from the voluntary abandonment, or legislative revokation of a right or responsibility.

Natural Negative Rights: All Natural Rights Obligations and Inalienations consist of negative rights: prohibitions on actions that would require the intervention of the insurers to bring about judgement, restitution, punishment, and prevention for the purpose of restoring sovereignty in demonstrated interests and reciprocity in display word and deed.

Contractual Positive Rights: All Contractual Rights Obligations and Inalienations consist of positive rights: Prohibition or Requiremetn for actions that are necessary to produce a desired common on behalf of the insurers and their dependents.

Public Contractual vs Semi-Private vs Private Positive Rights: whether legislative, corporate, or private contract is irrelevant, in that no contract may violate the Natural Rights, Obligations, and Inalienations of the members of the polity whether the insurers of the polity or their dependents. Even if it is possible to either create an exchange that equilibrates variations and maintains sovereignty and reciprocity in the process, or whether the polity accepts a debt in order to produce a future return that restores sovereignty and reciprocity over a limited time.

Internal Reciprocity of Rights: All rights require a reciprocal obligation and all obligations require a reciprocal right. Natural rights and obligations require inalienability. Contractual rights and and obligations may be alienated by revocation or cancelation by due process.

External Reciprocity of Rights: All those whose rights and obligations are insured, are required insure those same rights and obligations for all others insured in the polity.

Natural Necessary Right: A claim on community of insurers for defense of a demonstrated interest, that is necessary (natural, negative) or granted (contractual, positive) to all insured members of the polity.

Natural Necessary Obligation: A duty to the community of insurers to defend the demonstrated interests of insurers, by display, word, and deed, in behavior, speech, action, court, with force, or with war – whether the obligation is necessary (natural) or granted (contractual) to all insured members of the polity.

Natural Necessary Inalienation: The inviolability of these rights and obligations whether by the individual himself, by other individuals or by internal groups or by external groups. One may neither abandon those rights and obligations nor propose, threaten, enact, or act the abandonment or violation of those rights and obligations to the self or others.

Negative Legitimacy by Commonality ( … )

Positive Legitimacy by Concurrency ( …. )

Contractual (Legislated, Positive) Rights:  The rights obligations and inalienations under the terms of a legislative contract produced by prescribed due process of legitimacy, by the due process of legitimacy agreed to by the insurers.

Alienability of Contractual Rights: Inalienability of Natural (negative, defensive, law) Rights and Obligations, and alienability of Contractual (positive, assertive, legislation) Rights and Obligations.

The Spectrum of The Scopes of Rights

  1. Universal Demand (human nature for self determination, will to live)
  2. Internally Necessary (for non-conflict, and cooperation)
  3. Internally Imposed (unwillingly by force, barbarian, slave, serf)
  4. Internally Conditional (reciprocally insured by force: freeman, citizen, sovereign)
  5. Internally Contingent (on state of the polity by agreement and necessity, all)
  6. Internally Preferential (contractual, legislative)
  7. Externally Agreed
  8. Externally Opportunistic

4.1 – Spectrum of Rights: Existential, Natural Rights vs Preferential Contractually Constructed Rights.

The difference between a natural right and a legislated right or privilege is whether the rule is a natural necessity for satisfying the terms of self determination, sovereignty, and reciprocity, or whether it is a preference, or contractual right produced by concurrent legislation. Natural rights are discovered. Legislative (contractual) rights, obligations, and inalienations are constructed to serve preferences.

Any natural right we must possess under the natural law of self determination by sovereignty and reciprocity, by reciprocity must produce an equal obligation, and inalienation. 

Additionally, all natural rights must be expressed as obligation, reciprocal right of that obligation from others, and the inaliability of that right and obligation either voluntarily or involuntarily, because these rights are necessary not preferential for the prservation of self determination by sovereignty and reciprocity.

Additionally, while rule of law requires all law apply equally to everyone, and all legislation at least be general and not specific in application. This is the difference between a natural and existential right, and an unnatural or constructed right.

4.2 – The necessity of articulating natural existentially necessary rights obligations and inalienations

All natural rights derive from the necessity of self determination by sovereignty and reciprocity. And by presuming self determination by self determined means we need only define the terms of creaeting and preserving reciprocity under sovereignty and reciprocity.

By enumerating these rights we create a system of measurement for deciding the legitimacy (or criminality) of all subsequent rights, obligations, and inalienations.  This system of measurement can be used to construct all subsequent rights. And we prevent attempts at fraudulent construction of such rights, and fraudulent evasion of such rights and their obligations and inalienations.

4.3 – The Causal Origin of Rights, Obligations, and Inalienations.

Whereas the forces of:

The Universe (cold, radiation, many dangers)
… The Solar system (sun, and many dangers)
… … The Planet (geology, atmosphere, climate),
… … … Nature(flora and fauna),
… … … … Scarcity (resources)

Therefore, Given the requirements of:

Acquisition (Resources)
… Self Defense(Survival),
… … Self Determination(Agency),
… … … Cooperation(Capacity),
… … … … Sovereignty(Choice),
… … … … … Reciprocity(terms),
… … … … … … Duty(responsibilty), (This is where equality breaks down.)
… … … … … … … … Forbearance(Investment), (account for inequality)
… … … … … … … … … … (Returns: Variability, compatibility, divison of labor,
… … … … … … … … … … … ability(investment))
… … … … … … … … … … … (Losses: Dependence, Charity (insurance))
… … … … … … … … … … … … (Failure: Tolerance (Evasion))
… … … … … … … Liability(Accountability),
… … … … … … … … Warranty(Insurance)

Where Reciprocity Requires:

Productive,
Fully (exhaustively) Informed,
Warrantied,
Voluntary Transfer,
… Of Demonstrated Interests, 
… … Free of Imposition of costs, 
… … … Upon the demonstrated intersets of others, 
… … … … By externality,
Within the limits of possible due diligence,
Within the limits of restitution and liability.

Therefore;
Reciprocity places limits on our behavior in the form of:

Obligations to others
… Rights in the form of obligations from others
… … And Inalienations for ourselves and others.

Therefore;

As such, it is the responsibility of those who are able and willing to exchange the burden of insuring self derermination, by carrying the burden of responsibility and accountability for creating and maintaining reciprocity by those who are less able and willinng to do so.

Therefore;

It is only the form and magnitude of training, education, advice, persuasion, coercion, and punishment that those who are responsible and accountable for creating and maintaining reciprocity duty must apply, and submission to and duty of submission of those who require it, until able to equally share that responsibility and accountability – or to abandon one’s sovereignty as a consequence, thus limiting ones actions to what he or she is capable of, without imposing costs upon others.

Therefore;

Mankind as evolved a range of institutions both normative, informal, and formal for the purposes of training, educating, advising, persuading, coercing, and punishing humans to their maximum ability to bear responsibility and accountability and therefore share the labor, and reduce the cost, of producing  non aggression, non-conflict, and cooperation by reciprocal insurance of self determination by sovereignty in demonstrated interest and reciprocity in display word and deed.

To achieve the goal of duty to steward the production of self determination by self determined means, by sovereignty and reciprocity, there by domesticating humans, we have only three possible means of influence, persuasion, coercion and punishment:

  • Moral: Inclusion or Exclusion
  • Exchange: Reumuneration or Boycott
  • Force: Defense or Force

All influence is reducible to one or more (in combination) of these means of influence.

And
Therefore we developed Institutions of Cultural Production:

|Institutions|: Means Organization > Formalization > Scale

Moral: (social, normative, threat of exclusion)
… Scales to: Norms, Traditions, Religion, Religious Law
Exchanges: (commercial, material, threat of deprivation)
… Scales to: Norms, Weights and measures, Economy, Contract Law
Force: (police, military, state, threat of harm)
… Scales to: Norms, Courts, States, Militaries, Rule(Legislative Law)

And
Therefore;

We require a spectrum of means of communication and Intergeneral transfer: a system of weigths and measures that can scale up and down with the ability and willingness of the people in the polity.

|Precision|: Wisdom(obedience) > Advice(Choice) > Knowledge(Decidability)

Wisdom and Obedience: Fairy Tale, Fable, Parable, Myth, Theology
… Advice and Choice: Literature, Biography, History, Phililosophy
… … Knowledge and Decidability: Logics, Sciences, Economics, Law

And
A Sequence of Skills:

|Skills|: Training > Fitness > Cooperation > Education > Skills > Civil Service

  1. Training (Inclusion): Hygiene, Dress, Manners, Ethics, Morals, Traditions
  2. Fitness (Compatibility): physical fitness(physical), mindfulness(emotional), Environmental (basic life skills)
  3. Cooperation(Acquisition): Competition, Teamwork, Friendship, Mating, and Family (social)
  4. Education(Survival): the logic and grammars of measurement: reading and writing, arithmetic and mathematics, and the basics of geography and history, the basics of the physical sciences, the cooperative sciences including economics finance law and government – necessary for behavioral compatibility and commensurability with others in the polity. (economic commensurability)
  5. Skills (Depth of your value add): Training in one or more means of self determined means – productivity by the service of the self through the service of others. (Economic Self Determination)
  6. Civil Service: Parenting > Stewarding (the commons) > Management(organizing) > Governing (choice) > Ruling (conflict) ?

And
A Sequence of Institutions of Education:

|Education|: Family > Religion > Education > Academy > Military > Apprenticeship >  Experience > Administration > Judgment 

4.4 – The Causal Relationship between Inalienabilities, Obligations, and Rights.

Inalienables (duties) are the required to satisfy the demands of the exchange of insurance of self determination, sovereignty, and reciprocity. Obligations arise as necessary service to fulfill that duty. And Rights are the forbearances and affordances that result from the performance of those duties, by those who perform perform those obligatory duties, satisfying inalienability of those duties, and the priority of those duties in continous production of self determination by reciprocal insurance of sovereignty and reciprocity.

The Returns on Cooperation:

Require Suppression of Conflict, retaliation, and retaliation cycles
… Require Self Determination by self determined means
… … Require Sovereignty in demonstrated interests
… … … Require Reciprocity in display word and deed

Where self determination by soverignty and reciprocity requires;

Inalienabilities
… Obligations
… … Rights

And
Whereas we vary in ability and willingness for responsibility, accountability, and the scope of accountability;

Infant > Animal (Dependent, Unresponsible )
… Child > Slave (Dependent, Non-responsible and Unaccountable )
… … Youth > Serf (Dependent, Responsible but Unaccountable)
… … … Adult > Commoner > National (Responsible and accountable for self, commonsm “Single Men and Women”, Social)
… … … … Parent > (Responsible and Accountable for Self, and Family)
… … … … … … Visitor > Resident (Temporary or Contingent membership, responsible  and Accountable to do no harm to private and common, having via negativa court defense of natural ROIs, no via positiva political ROIs.)
… … … … … … Mother > Civilian (dependent for defense, but responsible for  offspring)
… … … … … … Freeman > Civilian (Responsible and Accountable for Defense and Maintenance of the commons.)
… … … … … Citizen (Responsible and Accountable for the Commons Creation, Holding Freemen Accountable, Political(responsible for many)
… … … … … … Headman > Sovereign (Responsible and Accountable for the Polity, Holding Citizens Accountable. Geopolitical (military and courts))

Where;

Originally a Freeman(Adult) was insured by himself, and his family, and had access to the courts domestically. A National was additionally insured by the State anywhere in the world. A Citizen additionally held duties for administration of the polity. And a Sovereign held the additional rsponsibility of a judge of last resort – providing decidability when necessary. So we have conflated freeman, national, citizen, and sovereign by universal enfranchisement, without maintaining demonstrated sufficiency of willingness and ability to produce equality of responsibility and accountability.

Therefore;

Either we are capable of entering into the exchange or not, if not and we are a dependent, then our participation in the benefits of the polity are predicated on our submission to reciprocity within the limits of your ability, imposed by those who have demonstrated ability and willingness to enter into the exchange of self determination by sovereignty and reciprocity.

Therefore;

The challenge we face is the sufficient enumeration of causality, obligations, rights, and inalienations, that we can determine whether we are correctly or incorrectly domesticating one another into the maximum responsibility and accountability that we are cabable of, even if we may not be willing to. 

Therefore;

We must enumerate a sufficient scope of obligations, rights, and inalienations that such determination and decidability is possible across the spectrum of human ability, whether dependent, freeman, national, citizen, or sovereign.

And we achieve that through construction from first principles of self determination below.

4.5 – All fundamental rights and obligations are strictly constructed from self-determination by sovereignty and reciprocity and inviolable and as such closed to modification or interpretation. 

All rights cover the range of, are organized by, and stated by display, word, and deed.

|Action|: Display > Word > Deed

Therefore;

  1. All rights require mutual (mirrored) reciprocity and so include mirrored obligations.
  2. All rights and obligations require universal obligation to defend rights and enforce obligations of others.
  3. All rights are inalienable, meaning that not only can you not surrender them (avoid obligations), but that any attempt by display word or deed to undermine them is a criminal act in and of itself.

This is the most rigorous definition of rights in human history. As such there are no positive fundamental rights, only negative, and all positive rights are contractual and conditional on possibility of fulfillment. This ends the ‘rights-labeling’ game by defining rights strictly.

Enumerating Natural, Necessary, Fundamental, Rights

4.6 – Enumerate All Fundamental, Natural Rights and Corresponding Obligations and Inalienations: 

PROBLEM STATEMENT:

The constitution includes the bill of rights. Founders debate whether enumeration of those rights was necessary because there was risk in enumerating them and engaging in risk of insufficiently doing so, versus the risk that subsequent generations would do worse. The reason being that they did not articulate Blackstone’s foundations of the natural common concurrent law in the constitution, assuming it was unnecessary. So they only partly solved the problem of preventing abuse of natural rights under the natural law, by enumeerating those they could, but failing to enumerate others, or enumerating them poorly as in the rights to free speech and religion, which are two of the weaknesses through which dissent and undermining has occurred.

So we have strictly, operationally, constructed the spectrum of natural rights and obligations to limit opportunities for the abuse of natural rigts and obligations given variations in the competency and bias of individuals who seek to produce political persuasion, argument, and decisions.

THEREFORE:
Disambiguate and enumerate all fundamental rights, obligations, and inalienations (ROI) under Natural Law. ROI can be disambiguated into the conditions under which people act as individuals and groups, as organizations, or as public institutions:

  • Personal (private)
  • Organizational (common)
  • Institutional (public).

Our ROIs remain the same whether we refer to individuals, organizations of individuals, or institutions consisting of individuals: reciprocal insurance of the self determination by self determined means of all insured by sovereignty in demonstrated interests, and reciprocity in display word and deed.

OUTLINE

  • 0. Sovereignty 
  • 1. Reciprocal Insurance of Sovereignty
    • 1.1 – Before Inclusion in the insured
    • 1.2 – Inclusion into the insured
    • 1.3 – During Inclusion in the insured
      • 1.3.1 – Insurance
      • 1.3.2 – Reciprocity
      • 1.3.3 – Truth
        • I.3.3.1 – Decidability
        • 1.3.3.2 – Testifiability
        • 1.3.3.3 – Epistemology
        • 1.3.3.4 – Truth
      • 1.3.4 – Irreciprocity
        • 1.3.4.1 – Deceptions
        • 1.3.4.2 – Crimes
        • 1.3.4.3 – Seditions
        • 1.3.4.4 – Treasons
      • 1.3.5 – Due Process
        • Negative Common Law
        • Positive Concurrent Legislation (Contractural ROIs (legislative, regulatory, command)
      • 1.3.6 – Exclusion
    • 1.4 – After Inclusion in the insured

THEREFORE:
GIVEN
… The Necessity of Solving the Preference for Survival;
AND
… The scarcity of time, and scarcity of resources to satisfy needs, preferences, and wants;
AND
… The necessity of cooperation across our lifetimes, and the irreplacable disproportionate returns on cooperation;
AND
… The persistent choice of predation, parasitism and conflict versus cooperation, versus avoidance and boycott;
REQUIRES
… The prevention of incentive for non-cooperation, retaliation, and retaliation cycles
REQUIRES
… Reciprocal Guarranty of Insurance of:
… … Self Determination By Self Determined Means
REQUIRES
… Rights, Obligations, and Inalienations of:
… … Minimum knowledge of this law, capacity of argument supporting it, parley (parliament) to codify it, parleys (houses) to produce commons under it, individual self defense of it, discipline of those failing it, court resolving it, judicial duel as escalation of it, posse as escalation of it, and force of arms (militia) to insure all of the above.

(Note: duel: a sovereign can deny the legitimacy of the court in the matter and thus resort to duel if both sides agree (judicially sanctioned duel), or abandon the contract for insurance, becoming an outlaw, thus enabling retaliation against one by the individual or the group. ergo criminals have the protection of the  insurers the court and the law. Outlaws rescind their insurance of others and their insurance of the outlaw. Therefore sovereignty cannot exist without the choice to abandon insurance by the group.)

WHERE The Possibility of:
… Self Determination by Self Determined Means
Requires
… Sovereignty (Before) Demonstrated interests
That Requires
… knowledge of the spectrum of demonstrated interests.
Consisting of:
… The Existential (Natural), 
… The Obtained (Direct),
… And The Common (Indirect).
AND the possibilty of:
… Sovereignty in Demonstrated interests
Requires:
… Reciprocity (During) in:
… … Deed, Words (truth, testimony), and Display
AND the Possibility of:
… Reciprocity in Deed and Display
Requires
… Knowledge of the criteria for reciprocity
Requring:
… the terms of Reciprocity:
… … Productive, Exhaustively Informed truthful speech, and Warrantied, Voluntary transfer of demonstrated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others.

AND WHERE the possibility of:
… Exhaustively informed truthful speech
Requires
… Reciprocal Testimonial Truth
Requires:
… Knowledge of truthful speech
Requires:
… The Criteria for truthful speech:
Requires the complete criteria for the testifiability of speech:
… Realism, Naturalism, Identity, Internal Consistency, Operational Possibiilty, External Correspondence, Bounded Rational Choice, Reciprocal Bounded Rational Choice, with Causal Parsimony, and Full Accounting, within Stated Limits, and within the limits of Liability and Restitutability.

Requires:
… Institutions of Insurance of Cooperative Assistance, Dispute Prevention, and Dispute Resolution
Consisting of:
… Weights and Measures 
Consisting of:
…  Habits, Manners, Norms, Traditions, Values, Ethics, Morals, Quantitative and qualitative Weights and Measures, certifications(trademarks), insurance (regulation, licenses), codes, legislation, laws, and constitutions.

AND Requring

… Institutions of Cooperative Assistance
… … Consisting of:
… … … freedom of truthful reciprocal speech, freedom of association, freedom of contract, contracts, regulation of weights and measures, money, banks, credit, treasuries, codes, regulations, parliaments, legislation for the production of private and common.

AND Consisting of:
… Prohibitons on the incentive to dispute, retaliate, engage in cycles of retaliation, cause repetition, cause imitation, cause defection, or war.

AND Requiring:
… Institutions of Dispute Resolution
… … Consisting of:
… … … Courts, Parliaments, (Monarchies), Citizens, Sheriffs, Militia, and Militaries

AS SUCH (THEREFORE):

THE FUNDAMENTAL OBLIGATIONS, RIGHTS, AND INALIENATIONS (ROIS) consist of:

I. RECIPROCAL INSURANCE OF SOVEREIGNTY:
The production Individual, private, common, and state Sovereignty in Demonstrated Interest:

WHERE
DEMONSTRATED INTEREST consists in
|Demonstrated Interests|: Natural > Acquired > Common.
(See Article III – Man – Demonstrated Interests)

  1. Natural Interests
  2. Acquired Interests (obtained)
  3. Common Interests

REQUIRES:

  1. … (Via Positiva) Obligation to insure by the Defense of the private and common demonstrated interests by display word and deed.
  2. … (Via Negativa) Rights to the insurance of one’s demonstrated interests both private and common in display word and deed.
  3. … (Via Equality) and the Inalienability of both those obligations and rights insuring of private and common demonstrated interests in display word and deed.

REQUIRES;
… Duty To The Institutions of Insurance, of the Production of Institutions of Cultural production of rights, obligations, inalienations, sovereignty and reciprocity:
… … personal, familial, interpersonal, local, social, economic, political, and geostrategic;

BY MEANS OF:
… Display BY;
… …  dress, manners, behavior, and all other means of non-verbal communication.
… Word BY;
… … Informing(ignorance), Correction(error, bias), Warning and Threat(Coercion), Courts(determination, restitution, punishment, prevention), Parliaments (Public Record of Right, Obligation, Inalienation), (Monarchies (decider of last resort)),
… And Deed BY;
… … Physical force(violence), Bearing and Using Arms(Bearable Arms), Bearing and Crewing Armaments and Equipment whether individual, group, or institutional, 
… BY the necessary scale of:
… … Citizens, Sheriffs, Posses(criminal), Militia(organized), and Militaries(states);
… BY necessary scale of:
… … coercion, restraint, relocation, imprisonment, punishment, harm, or death
… AND where required:
… … Punishment by psychological means in time.
… … Abuse by psychological or physical means over time.
… … Torture in those rare cases where the individual is acting against the innocent in pursuit of personal or collective interest or ambition, but never in the case of duty under natural rights and obligations.

THEREFORE: 
… You have the inalienable right and obligation to lead a lawful life, where lawfulness is determined this natural law – or to exit the polity and the insurance it provides, whether by limitation on your rights, your departure, your incarceration, or your extermination.

AND;
Those fundamental rights are produced before inclusion, maintained during inclusion, and withdrawn after inclusion.

1.1 – BEFORE INCLUSION:
GIVEN the difference betwen: 
… The Ingroup Insurers vs Outgroup and their insurers.
And the duration and durability of duration of rights, obligations, and inalienations (ROIs);
THEN;
… Given the insurers of self determination by self determined means, by sovereignty and reciprocity determine the membership or ‘ingroup’ then Ingroup Natural Rights (insured, unconditional, existential) vs Outgroup Allied Contractual Rights (insured, conditional) vs  Outgroup Offered Potential Rights (uninsured, contitional) vs Outgroup Offered Opportunistic Rights (uninsured, transactional).

|Conditionality of Rights|: Ingroup Necessary Natural Rights > Ingroup Contractual Rights > Outgroup Allied Contractual Rights >  Potential Rights > Opportunistic Rights 

THEREFORE;
Given the three persistent possibilities and availability of the choices of interaction, by the incentives to predation, parasitism, deception, conflict and war, versus the incentives for cooperation, whether opportunistic, contingent, continuous versus the incentive for avoidance, boycott, disassociation, speparation, and defense;

AND GIVEN;
The extent of rights that are rational and useful are in proportion to the value and consistency of reciprocal cooperation minus the cost of irreciprocal non-cooperation,

THEREFORE;
The offering of rights in anticipation of reciprocal exchange of those rights is a utility for the purpose of developing that exchange of rights, and otherwise no rights exist; and as such no crime, ethics, or morals can exist between those who have not exchanged the rights of sovereignty and reciprocity.

AND;
Additionally, instead of assuming or granting rights, we offer the promise of exchange of rights, to the degree we wish to either incentivize coopration or incentivize war, conflict, predation, and parasitism.

THEREFORE;
The process of incremental increase in the exchange of promise of rights of sovereignty and reciprocity may continue, abate, or restart until the rights are fully exchanged.

UNTIL;
Parties fully integrate into the same polity and means of political decision making, by reciprocal insurance of Self Determination by Self Determined means by Sovereignty, Reciprocity, and Rights Obligations and Inalienations of marginal indifference between members and groups of members.

1.2 – THE PROCESS OF INCLUSION: NATURALIZATION (ENTRY AND ASSOCIATION) AND DENATURALIZATION (EXIT AND DISASSOCIATION) SECESSION

WHEREAS;
Integration into a polity consists of a spectrim of ROIs of Association with The Spectrum of a Polity’s Capital whether:

|Capital|: Territorial(Space), Social(people), Economic(trade), Political(influence), Institutional(Insurance), Military(insurers).

GIVEN;
One can be insured or uninsured by the insurers of a polity because:

|Entry|: One is Born Into (dependent) > Mature Into (independent) > Outsider Immigrate into (potential independent) > or Outsider Captured Into(dependent to potential independent)

AND one can exit or be exited from the polity:

|Exit|:Voluntary Disassociation (exit) > Or Responsibility Status reduced > 

AND;
One’s Capacity for responsibility can be demonstrated:

|Responsibility for ROIs|: ability (maturity, mind, and body) > competency (knowledge and skill) > and willingness(choice), for insuring the ROIs of other members of the polity;

AND;
One’s Capacity for Radius(scope) of Responsibility can be demonstrated:

|Radius|: Self > Others(social) > Spouse > Dependents > Others  in Production of goods, services, information, or organization, whether private or common, and whether of materials, tools, production, business, political, regional, state, federation, geopolitical, military-militial-police.

THEREFORE;
One’s Responsibility Status as:

|Status|: Dependent > Resident(visitor) > National > Civilian > Citizen > Sovereign Responsibility Status (Class)

… must be determined by meeting criteria for the responsibility and accountability necessary for the performance of the duties of the role in the class.

AND WHEREAS;
A political decision by the insurers of successful integration of this individual into the polity by contributing on one hand and doing no harm on the other.
… (a) Politically set the terms of entry and exit, of requirements and limits on display word and deed, of costs, of insurance, and of benefits.
… (b) Politically obtain permission for entry or force of exit by those terms, whether because of political interest for a class, organizational interest in the utility of the individual, or a private interest in an individual or family.
… (c) Politically determine the Responsibility Status of the individual on the spectrum of dependent to sovereign.
… (d) Politically determine the insurer of the group or individual as either political (all), organizational (some) or individual (one).

THEREFORE;
All polities must produce and maintain a public ritual or administrative process and procedure for:
… (a) the naturalization of individuals and groups into the habits, norms, traditions, values institutions that must be achieved within a time frame that prevents them from doing any harm to any of the above, and establishes their degree of responsibility and accountability to the polity for their actions and those of any of their dependents.
… (b) the change in status and class of the individual as the individual’s ability, competency, and choice, by demonstrated behavior, whether by success or failure.
… (c) the expulsion of the individual group or class, the time frame for doing so, the force necessary to do so if any, and the restitution demanded of them for any harms done.

AND THEREFORE;
One cannot claim to exercise or apply to others demand for insurance of any natural rights without success at the process of naturalization. And outside of naturalization all natural ROIs are merely useful or not in obtaining and preserving coopreation on specifically exchanged terms.

AND THEREFORE;
One cannnot claim natural rights for any form of life or imitation of life, that cannot equally, reciprocally, exchange Natural ROIs.

AND THEREFORE;
Insurers may only insure non-human life, artificial life, imitation of life, or objects as Dependents or as Private or Common Demonstrated Interests, determined by utility or preference – and if for no other reason than the aesthetic in the positive, or in the negative that people who do not insured such life and objects are not those we wish among us in our polity because such behavior poses the risk such behavior will be repeated by application harmfully elsewhere.

1.3 – DURING INCLUSION (IN THE POLITY(INGROUP))

Once Naturalized (Included) into the polity, every insurer guarrantees that he reciprocally insures the rights, obglibations, and inalienations of every other insurer and his or her dependents, whether those RIOs are natural or contractual.

NATURAL, NEGATIVE, RIGHTS, OBLIGATIONS, INALIENATIONS AND CONTRACTUAL POSITIVE RIGHTS OBLIGTIONS AND INALIENATIONS
( … )

( … link these … , turn the list in to dependent sentence form in hierarchy )

1.3.1 – INSURANCE (DUTIES, OBLIGATIONS)

WHEREAS;
All political organization, and as such, all governance, consists of reciprocal insurance, by the insurers of the polity, of the all capital of the polity, as in all demonstrated interests of the polity:

|Capital|: natural, cooperative, obtained, several, shareholder, title, common, formal, informal, and future.

IN THE CONTEXT of all markets in the polity:

|Markets? association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, polities, and war.

WHERE Insurance is produced by:

|Insurance|: display, behavior, speech, physical action, force, court, political action, organized violence, or war.

WHERE all rights, obligations, and inalienations, consist of criteria for insurance of all capital of the polity. All rights consist of either negative rights, obligations, and inalienations applicable to all whether Insurer or Dependent, or of positive rights obligations and alienations applicable to those Insurers with the demonstrated ability, competency, and will to exercise them.

AND WHERE;
Natural, Negative Rights Obligations and Inalienations (ROIs) include:

|Natural ROIs|: Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, and Due Process.

AND WHERE;
Contractual Positive Rights Obligations and Inalienations (ROIs) include:

|Contractual ROIs|: Legislation, Regulation, and Contract

AND WHERE; 
The all such Insurance of Natural and Contractual Rights, Obligations, Inalienations and Due process constrains all actors to Reciprocity.

WHERE;
1.3.2 – RECIPROCITY

Reciprocity consists of the via-negativa elimination of incentives to avoid cooperation, to boycott, to retaliate, and to engage in retaliation cycles, whether by interpersonal personal social, economic, political, military, and strategic, by evasion or boycott, undermining or sedition, and theft, harm, or war.

Reason for Cooperation

Cooperation requires a coincidence of wants that can be voluntarily satisfied by the actions of both parties.

Benefits of Cooperation

Cooperation provides a disproportionate return on time and effort that is not achievable by an individual alone. The benefits of cooperation scale from the individual to the group to very large groups. These benefits are dute to division of labor (concentration of time), division of knowledge (concentration of time), reduction or elimination of switching costs (concentration of time), reduction or elimination of transaction costs (concentration of time), and division of and reduction of responsibility (risk). The result is a non linear increase in returns on cooperation, and an additinoal decrease in overall costs, and an additional increase in overall returns of roughly twenty percent, with every doubling of the number of people cooperating. This concentration of productivity in time is the reason for the value of cooperation, and why voluntary cooperation determines the condition of a people.

  1. Division of Labor,
  2. Division of Knowledge,
  3. Reduction of Switching Costs,
  4. Reduction of Transaction Costs, 
  5. Division of and Reduction of Responsibility (Risk)

Logic of Cooperation

The logic of cooperation consists of only three choices, within those choices, and the time duration of that choice:

  1. Conflict: Extermination(Permanent) > Predation(Opportunistic) > Parasitism(Continous)
  2. … Avoidance: Boycott(Permanent) > Evasion(Opportunistic) > Avoidance(Continuous)  
  3. … … Cooperation: Exchange (Opportunistic) > Contract(Temporary) > Duty(Continuous)

Criteria for Cooperation

The criteria for cooperation is the reduction of risk sufficient to justify the returns, where the lower the risk of cooperation the more frequent the cooperation the lower the costs of cooperation and the greater the returns on cooperation. (Note that this is a via-negativa explanation of cooperation.)

  1. Absence of disincentive to cooperation, by the absence of the spectrum of conflict (risk)
  2. Presence of opportunity for increasing demonstrated interests (capital increases reduce risk over time (create benefits in time))
  3. Presence of the conditions for the reduction or elimination of risk (reciprocity).

Committment to Cooperation

This sequence consists of the process of increasing commitment and specificity:

|Specificity|: cooperation > agreement > consent

It starts with a general intention to work together (cooperation), becomes more specific with a mutual understanding about what that work will involve (agreement), and culminates in a voluntary and informed decision to proceed with the agreed-upon action (consent).

The Dimensions of Reciprocity:

Reciprocity requires limiting our display, word, and deed to:
… Productive and;
… Fully informed (truthful and complete);
… … Free of Hazards (Baitings into Hazard)
… … … and Regardless of cost;
… Voluntary(and Subjective) Transfer (or exchange);
… … of Demonstrated (and objective) Interests
… … … … Free of Imposition of costs
… … … … Upon the Demonstrated Interests of Others;
… … … … … Either Directly or indirectly by Externality
… Within the limit of possible due diligence (by the actors); (part of what the law achieves is a collection of due diligences within a domain).
… Within the limit of incentive for in-group defection (proportionality);
… Within The Limit of the Utility of Future Cooperation with outgroups;
… And liable and warrantied,
… … within the limits of restitutability;
… Eliminating the incentive of retaliation and retaliation cycles,
… And imposition of costs upon the commons of trust by which all ingroup cooperate;
… Leaving only the knowledge and incentive to cooperate, and gain the continous benefits of continued cooperation.
… (Velocity of cooperation, prosperity from velocity)

WHERE
Display Word Deed Consists of:
Any means by which information can be produced and transferred, or unproduced and witheld:
… Display: passive observable information or behavior, signaled or unsignaled
… Word: active sounds, or words, stated or unstated
… Deed: actions or inactions
Or any combination thereof: Such as Writing (display and word), Flag Waving (display and deed), Acting in a Play(word and deed).

AND;
Productive (Gain, Beneficial, Not a Loss) Consists of:
Any action, transfer, or exchange causes all parties increase the inventory of their demonstrated interests, and no party experiences a net loss in demonstrated interests.

AND;
Fully Informed (Not under-informed) Consists of:
Exhaustively informed (complete), by truthful (testimonial) speech, within the limits of possible due diligence.

AND;
Free of Baitings into Hazard Consists of:
Seduction, enticement, baiting, or entrapment into an asymmetric risk, where one benefits from other’s bearing of risk, cost, or harm and takes advantage of human tendency to seek gains now and minimize incremental risks over time. Especially when Advertising, Gambling, Usury, Prostitution, Drugs, and deceptive, false, or impossible political, religious, pseudoscientific, and promises are the most common moral hazards.

Note: Disambiguation: Hazard (risk), Hazarding (the act by it’s nature), and Baiting into Hazard(unintuitive that the act is a hazard due to ignorance, possibility, or probability.).  limit risky exchanges to people who fully understand the risks, and are capable of managing regulating avoiding them, especially over time.

AND;
Regardless of Cost (to what and whom) Consists of:
The requirement to bear these costs and the costs of warranty and insuring them regardless of emotional, psychological, physical, material, costs to your demonstrated interests and the demonstrated interests of others by externality.  

AND;
Voluntary Transfer (Not involuntary) Consists of:
The disposition (use, release, consumption, destruction) of a demonstrated interest, knowingly, willingly, by choice, and free of coercion to do so, in exchange for a subjective or objective benefit or gain.

AND;
Demonstrated interests Consists of:
An investment by action or forgoing of action, in a monopoly, proportional, or partial control of, or benefit from, any form of capital (resource) whether personal, familial, kin, kith, associative, cooperative, material, behavioral, informational, informal or formal, existential or opportunistic, which humans demonstrate they desire to save, use, transform, trade, consume, or destroy.

AND:
Externality Consists of:
Any side effect or consequence of an display word or deed that affects the demonstrated interests of other parties involved in the action.

AND;
Due Diligence Consists of:
The care that a reasonable person, given the limits of his abilities, exercises to avoid the imposition of costs on the demonstrated interests of others by a comprehensive, systematic, and investigative process undertaken to assess and evaluate the potential risks, rewards, and opportunities associated the action or actions – thereby permitting truthful warranty, and even if requiring restitution (Tort), eliminating incentive for retaliation and punishment (crime) in the case of any undesired outcome.

AND;
Ingroup, Outgroup Consists of:
The ingroup refers to those members of the polity that are insured by the insurers of the polity vs the outgroup refers to those that are not insured by the insurers of those members of the polity, where the polity is defined by the insurers and insured.

AND;
Warrantied Consists of:
Liability for restitution (repair, replacement, compensation), punishment, and prevention should the transfer result in imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others internal or external to the transfer because of a failure to meet the terms of Reciprocity.

AND;
Limit Of Resitutability Consists of:
One cannot warranty the restitutability when restitution is either impossible or beyond one’s means, without including an additional insurer external to the transfer who will provide restitution in the event of conflict. As such one is limited to actions transfers and exchanges that are within his limits of resitution.
(“Don’t write a check your ass can’t cash”, “Can you pay for that? Then don’t touch it”)

AND;
Retaliation and retaliation cycles Consists of:
Imposing costs on the demonstrated interests of another or others as a response to an imposition of costs on one’s demonstrated interests, and most often occurs when one individual or group seeks to punish or dissuade another individual or group from imposition of costs upon their demonstrated interests. 

AND;
Commons of Trust Consists of:
The informal capital consisting of the expectation that all other parties in the polity will insure the sovereignty of every other party’s demonstrated interests, and one another’s reciprocity in display word and deed, thereby incrementally reducing all risk, increasing the complexity, scale and rate of cooperative, innovative, adaptive, and evolutionary coooperation, maximizing the prosperity of all members of the polity. This is the most costly capital to produce requiring the most diligence, but having the highest returns of all.

OR;
Combinations thereof:

Such as Productive AND Voluntary:
Productive and Voluntary is easiest to explain by the case of blackmail that may include a voluntary exchange but represents a net loss of demonstrated interest capital by the blackmailed. If we include the female means of antisocial behavior, in addition to the male then blackmail is also involuntary as well as unproductive. Blackmail forces a cost of defense, violating the principle of insurance of the demonstrated intersets of others. a) must not violate the principle of reciprocal insurance of demonstrated interests. b) must not impose a cost on the demonstrated interests of another or others c) must not force an exchange by the force of a threat against the demonstrated interest of another or others. Conversely, ‘we don’t need your approval to increase your capital demonstrated interests’ because that’s how we create value (capital) in the commons by so much indirection. (To what ends, to what capital, over what time scale?) 

THEREFORE;
Inalienability of Responsibility: And in summary, there are no conditions under which one can avoid responsibility for the imposition of costs.

AND;
1.3.3 – TRUTH (RECIPROCITY IN WORD)
WHERE;

Fully Informed, Complete, Truthful Speech Consists In:

Testimony that Satisfies Demand for Infallibility in the context in question, including, liability given the number of people and severity of the imposition of costs on their demonstrated interests as a consequences of failure.

|Tests of Truth|: Sufficiency of Testifiability vs Decidability vs Liability vs Population vs Severity vs Risk Against The Spectrum of Irreciprocities.

AND 
1.3.3.1 – DECIDABILITY
WHERE Decidability consists in:

  • Decidability is a criterion used to evaluate whether a statement can be tested and resolved as true or false.
  • While Truth is a criterion used to evaluate whether a statement is testifiable in all dimensions humans are capable of testifying to.
  • And Liability is the criterion used to determine whether a satement can satisfy the demand for infallibilty in the context in question,
  • Determined by the number of people dependent upon it,
  • and the severity of the effect on their demonstrated interests.

AND

Decidability requires bottom up survival from falsification by the possibility of construction from first principles, and truthfulness requires top down survival from falsification by tests of consistency, correspondence, and coherence with observables. And decidable truth consists of surviving both the bottom up and top down attempts at falsification. (This is also the difference between computation and mathematics, as well as operationalism and verbal logic of sets.)

THEREFORE;

|Decidability| Decidable(computable) < Discretionary(Reasonableness) < Choice(preference, presumed good) < Random Selection (undecidable) < In-actionable < Incoherent

THEREFORE;

Tests of Decidability by Decidable Truth,

REQUIRES

Tests of the Testifiability of Testimonial Truth (Truthfulness).

WHERE;

Tests of Decidability Consists In:

  1. In the REVERSE: a question (statement) is DECIDABLE if an algorithm (set of operations) exists within the limits of the system (rules, axioms, theories) that can produce a decision (choice). In other words, if information sufficient for the decision is present (ie: is decidable) within the system(ie: grammar) in the absence of appeal (default to) intuition.
  2. In the OBVERSE: Instead, we should determine if there is a means of choosing without the need for additional information supplied from outside the system (ie: not discretionary).

Or;
If DISCRETION, by appeal to (default to) intuition or preference, is necessary then the question is undecidable, and if discretion is unnecessary, a proposition is decidable. This separates reasoning (in the narrow sense) from calculation (in the wider sense) from computation (algorithm).

AND WHERE;
The Sufficiency of Decidability consists in the Spectrum of Demand for Infallibility of Decidability, Consists of:

|Sufficiency of Decidability|: Intelligible > Reasonable > Actionable > Ethical and Moral > Normative > Judicial > Scientific > Logical > Tautological.

BEFORE
Me:

  • Intelligible: (Observe) Decidable enough to imagine a conceptual relationship
  • Reasonable: (Orient) Decidable enough for me to feel confident that my decision will satisfy my needs, and is not a waste of time, energy, resources.
  • Actionable: (Decide)Decidable enough for me to take actions given time, effort, knowledge, resources.

    DURING (Action)
    Others:
  • Ethical and Moral: Decidable enough for me to not impose risk or costs upon the interests of others, or cause others to retaliate against me, if they have knowledge of and transparency into my actions.
  • Normative: Decidable enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion among my fellow people with similar values.
  • Judicial: Decidable enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion across different peoples with different knowledge, comprehension and values.

  • AFTER (Next ‘Before’ condition)
    Informational (Public Speech)
  •  
  • Scientific: Decidable regardless of all opinions or perspectives (True)
  • Logical: Decidable out of physical or logical necessity
  • Tautological: Decidedly identical in properties (referents) if not references (terms). So to borrow the one of many terms from Economics, we can see in this series (list) a market demand for increasingly infallible decidability.

AND;

1.3.3.2 – TESTIFIABILITY
WHERE; 
GIVEN;
the Human Faculties that limit testifiability:

|Human Faculties|: Sense > Perception > Auto Association > Prediction > Imagination >  Attention > Comparison > Reason > Seelction

  1. Sense (stimuli)
    … … Perception (composition)
    … … … Auto-Association
    … … … … Imagination Facility (prediction)
    … … … … … Attention
  2. Logic Facility (constant relations)
    … … Comparison (competition)
    … … … Reason Facility (wayfinding, permutation)
    … … … … Selection (decision, choice)
  3. Grammar facility (statements)
    … … Episode Formation (organization)
    … … … Disambiguation (indexing)
    … … … … Wayfinding (navigation)
    … … … … … Search For Agreement(Cooperation) (understanding, agreement – or not)

AND;
Given the human grammatical facility: 

The Human Grammatical Facility consists of the evolution of human navigational way-finding between locations, places, spaces, and objects, then into human memory of and the ability to manipulate states of spaces, objects, and people from one state to another, then into description of episodes (contexts), actors(people, objects, processes) in states, and the operations (processes, actions) that change states, then into new episodes (states) by the cognitive process of wayfinding: by “continous recursive disambiguation” of ambiguity into an unambiguous episode (context) that others can agree with(understand, true, cooperate) or disagree with (fail to undrstand, false, not cooperate.)

  1. Grammar facility (statements)
    … … Paradigms (‘metaphysics’, ‘dimensions’, ‘episodes’)
    … … Vocabulary
    … … … Sounds
    … … … Signs (acts, actions)
    … … … Marks (records)
    … … … … accidental
    … … … … intentional
    … … … … … Mark
    … … … … … Symbol
    … … … … … … Glyph
    … … … … … Pictogram
    … … … … … Picture
    … … … … … Picture Series
    … … … … … Animation
  2. And capacity for logical:
    … imprecision
    … inflation
    … conflation
    … failure of disambiguation
  3. And therefore capacity for (precision)
    … Measurements
    … Testimonal Langauge
    … Persuasive Langauge
    … Narrative Language
    … Ordinary Language
    … Idiomatic Language
    … Fictional Language
    … Fraudulent Language
    … Denial, Reversal, Projection and Reflection

THEREBY;
Producing the Spectrum of Human Communication Facilities

WHERE GIVEN;

The construction of communication:

|Communication|: Human Senses > Human Embodiment > Human Perception > Human Memory > Human Spatial-Temporal Organizational Facility > Human Wayfinding Facility > Human Grammatical Facility > Permissible Dimensions > Resulting Paradigms > Measurements(vocabulary) > Names(Nouns) > State Changes(Verbs) > Agreements(Yes/No,True/False,Comprehensible/Not) > Recursion(Combination) > Transactions (Events) > Ledgers (Episodes) > Journals(Narratives). 

WHERE;

Dimensions

What dimensions of measurement are permissible when attempting to measure some context, where that context is a subset of experience?
(Note that there are a large number but limited number of dimensions percievable by man, and most dimensions consist of sets of dimensions for the purpose of disambiguation.) 

Paradigms

These dimensions of measurement produce a paradigm or set of dimensions that limit the information we can include and consider in any ‘calculation’ (in the loosest sense). This assists us in disambiguation of experience into increasingly precise measurements.

Vocabulary

Vocabulary consists of measurements organized into scales that describe a dimension within the paradigm. This assists us in disambiguation of experience into even more precise measurements.

Nouns(Names of States in time)

Nouns(general) and Adjectives(precision) consists of names of states in time.

Verbs

Verbs(general) and Adverbs(Precision) consist of Names of Transitions(abstract) or Operations(actions) over time.

Agreements

Agreements consist of Tests of Equality between the communication used by the author, and understanding produced in the audience. (Including the self.)

THEREFORE;
RESULTING IN:

The “Spectrum of Grammars (rules) of continous recursive disambiguation within a paradigm” for the purpose of communicating measurements within this paradim such that they are sufficiently unambiguous for communication, understanding, and agreement or not. In other words, all langauge consists of measurements of varying degrees of precision to imprecision to deception.

  1. Communication Facility (“Language”)
    … Measurements
    … … .Formal Science
    … … … Logics (deflationary Grammars)
    … … … Mathematics
    … … … Algorithms
    … … Physical Sciences
    … … … Physics
    … … … Chemistry
    … … … Biology
    … … … Sentience (Consciousness)
    … … Behavioral Sciences
    … … … Metaphysics (Language)
    … … … Psychology
    … … … Sociology
    … Disciplines (Applied)
    … … … Medicine (Repair and Maintenance)
    … … … Engineering (Transformation)
    … … … Accounting, Finance, Economics (Measurement)
    … … … Economics (Cooperation)
    … … … History (Categorization and Summation)
    … … … Law (Dispute Resolution)
    … Communication
    … … Testimony (warrantied by due diligence
    … … Rhetorics (argumentative, persuasive Grammars)
    … … Written (Formal) Language
    … … ORDINARY LANGUAGE (Informal, colloquial, and Idiomatic)
    … … Narrative (description)
    … Education
    … … Narrations (inflationary Grammars)
    … … Storytelling (loading, framing)
    … Deceits
    … … Fictionalism
    … … … Pseudoscience -> Magic (including math)
    … … … Idealism-> Surrealism, and
    … … … Supernaturalism->Occult
    … … Obscurantism (Obscuring, Overloading)
    … … … Misdirection (Deceit)
    … … … Propaganda
    … … … Disinformation
    … … … Social Construction
    … … Fraud (for gain)
    … … Undermining
    … … Harm (Evil, for harm regardless of gain)

AND;
WHERE;

The Grammar of Testifiable Speech Consists in the 

  1. Fully expanded Complete Sentences
  2. Consisting of all actors, actions, and consequences of change in state
  3. From an observer’s point of view (first person)
  4. In promissory form
    … Stated or Implied beginning with “I promise that …”
  5. In operational vocabulary (as actions)
  6. In testimonial form 
    … where all descriptions are observable and testifiable by the testifier (first person) (Not reading minds, etc.)
  7. Absent the verb to-be (is, are, was, were…)
    … Absent ambiguity, conflation, inflation, loading, framing by removing the copula, and therefor requiring explicity description of means of existence, unless expressing the continuous tense. (such as  standing, speaking, digging, visiting).
  8. And where any assumption you made or make is declared as such.
  9. Including all changes in state
  10. Producing a series of testable transactions.

AND;
Where Grammatical Testifiability consists of:

Expanding any ordinary language, from ideomatic to casual, to formal, to formal written, into grammatically testifiable form, where in can then be falsified as surviving Grammatical Testifiability or not. 

As such one need not necessarily speak in Grammatically Testifable form, but that one’s testimony must survive Grammatical Testifiabiilty.

AND;
Where the Criteria for Testifiable Speech Consists in:

Coherence Across the Dimensions Testifiable by Man, in The Series:

  1. Existential > The Physical Laws of the Universe
    … 1. Realism >
    … 2. Naturalism >
  2. Possible > The Formal Laws of the Universe
    … 7. Operational – Demonstrable Sequence >
    … 8. Empirical – Externally Correspondent >
    … 9. Logical – Internally Consistent >
    … 10. Unambiguous – categorical identity >
  3. Rational > Behavioral (Natural) Laws of the Universe
    … 10. Rational Choice – Demonstrated Preference >
    … … 11. Incentives – Demonstrated Interest >
    … … … 12. Body, Mind, Memory, Effort, Time
    … … … 13. Mates, Offspring, Kin
    … … … 14. Status, Reputation, Kith
    … … … 15. Several Interests (in many forms)
    … … … 16. Common Interests (in many forms)
    … 17. Reciprocal >
    … … 18. Productive (reciprocal increase in capital)
    … … 19. Exhaustively Informed (due diligence gainst deceit)
    … … 20. Voluntary Transfer >
    … … 20. Free of Negative Externality >
    … 21. Organizable >
    … … 22. Power Distribution of Law >
    … … 23. Pareto Distribution of Assets >
    … … 24. Nash Distribution of Rewards >
  4. Survivable > Evolutionary Laws of the Universe 
    … 25. Prevents Regression to the Mean (loss of biological capital)
    … 25. Preserves Natural Selection (selection by merit)
    … 27. Increases Adaptivity (biological capital)
  5. Complete >
    … 26. Limits, Completeness, Full Accounting,
    … 27. Consistency, Coherence, Parsimony
  6. Competitive – in the market for theories
    … 29. Sufficient – Satisfies the Demand For Infallibility
    … 30. Parsimony – In competition with other testimonies
  7. Warrantable >
    … 32. (i)as having performed due diligence in the above dimensions;
    … 33. (ii)where due diligence is sufficient to satisfy the demand for infallibility;
    … 34. (iii)and where one entertains no risk that one cannot perform restitution for.

AND;
1.3.3.3 –  EPISTEMOLOGY
WHERE;
The confidence in our knowledge is produced by the epistemology life cycle consists of a series of recursive steps:

|Knowledge, Epistemic Process|: Problem, Question, Experience  -> Observation -> [stage: hypothesis, theory, establsihed theory, law] -> Falsification -> and either Fail and Repeat, Restart or -> Increase Falsification, Repeat.

AND
WHERE;
the epistemic process requires;

|Epistemology|: Fact > Theory > Law

  1. A Fact consists in a repeatable test producing a repeatable observation, recorded as a commensurable(standard) measurement, by instrumentation, thereby limiting human bias and error, within the context a hypothesis or theory.
  2. A Theory consists of an explanation for cause and effect, and a logic, formula or measurement that describes the state, transformation, or states, that has been tested in the market for applied theories and so far survived.
  3. A Law consists of the description of the theory in formula form, whether logical, ordinal, or mathematical and cardinal, that describes a irreducible first principle consistent with all observables.

AND
WHERE;
The epistemic process (cycle) consists in; A Sequence of disambiguation by cycles of:

|Disambiguation Cycle|: Problem -> Theory -> Test

Because all new knowledge consists of the discovery of wayfinding our way to a solution using the human wayfinding facility applied to that faculty we call reason.

And the full epistemic cycle of continuous recursive disambiguation using the disambiguation cycle consists of:

|Epistemic Cycle|: Problem > Free Association > Hypothesis > Working Theory > Settled Theory > Law > Metaphysical Presumption.

WHERE;

1) Free association: results from Observation (Experience).
2) Hypothesis: results from The Test of Reasonableness (Mental test)
… Reasonable: wiIthin the limits of your ability and knowledge, including whith knowledge you can obtain without attempting an experiment.
3) Working Theory: results from Performing Due Diligence (Existential test)
… A Physical Test: within the limits of your ability to perform and measure a a test against the real world.
4) Scientific, Settled, or Established Theory: results from the test of Survival in the market for application (market test)
… An Applied Test: within the limits of the market for the application of the theory.
5) Law if Mathematical or First Principle if not mathematical (Survival): results from Testing the Exhaustion of Falsification: Reduced to Irreducible first cause (First Principle)
… A Surival Test: A exhaustively tested irreducible description for which the market for application has eliminated all known means of falsification.
6) Habituation into metaphysical presumptions: results from Survival in the market for Convention.
… Survival by integration into the presumptions (metaphysics) of the population as a general rule or rule of thumb.
7) Repeating this cycle: results from Falsification and reformation (re-falsification) by the failure of any step in this cycle.
… When a new application has been discovered that falsifies the degree of precision of the theory, established theory, or law, requring alteration of the law to address the newly required degree of precision.

Note: while the market for hypotheses produces majority falsehood, the general trend in science is not necessarily that surviving theories are falsified, but that they discover a demand for increase in precision. 

AND
1.3.3.4 – TESTIFIABLE TRUTH
WHERE;
Truth consists of the series:

|Truth|: Treason > Sedition > Fraud > Deceit > Dishonesty > Incaution > Honesty > Reasonableness > Truthfulness > Testifiable Truth > Decidable Truth > Ideal Truth > Analytic Truth > Tautological Truth.

  1. Tautological Truth: That testimony you give when promising the equality of two statements using different terms: A circular definition, a statement of equality or a statement of identity.
  2. Analytic Truth: The testimony you give promising the internal consistency of one or more statements used in the construction of a proof in an axiomatic(declarative) system. (a Logical Truth).
  3. Ideal Truth: That testimony (description) you would give, if your knowledge (information) was complete, your language was sufficient, stated without error, cleansed of bias, and absent deceit, within the scope of precision limited to the context of the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possessed of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony. (Ideal Truth = Perfect Parsimony.  The Completely disambiguated description constructed exclusively from first prinicples. We tend only to know reductio ideal truths.)
  4. Decidable Truth: Truthtfulness that satisfies the demand for infallibility in the context inquestion. (See Decidability below.)
  5. Testifiable Truth: That testimony you give that survives the tests of possibility of testifiabiilty in the dimensions it is possible for humans to testify to: realism, naturalism, identity(unambiguity), logical consistency, operational possibility, observable external correspondence, rational choice within the limits of bounded rationality, reciprocal rational choice, complete and fully accounted within stated limits, and within the limits of restitutability.
  6. Truthfulness: High Due Diligence: A Performative Truth: that testimony (description) you give if your knowledge (information) is incomplete, your language is insufficient, you have performed due diligence in the elimination of error, imaginary content, wishful thinking, bias, fictionalism, and deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and which you warranty to be so; and the promise that another possessed of the knowledge, performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.
    1. Hypothesis (reasoning)
    2. Theory (empirical testing)
    3. Survival (survived empirical testing in the market)
  7. Reasonableness: Medium Due Diligence: that testimony (description) you give, as justification for your reporting of your belief, justification, preference, coice, or actions with full knowledge that knowledge is incomplete, your language is insufficient, but you have not performed due diligence in the elimination of error and bias, but which you warranty is free of deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.
  8. Honesty: Low Due Diligence: that testimony (description) you give with full knowledge that knowledge is incomplete, your language is insufficient, but you have not performed due diligence in the elimination of error and bias, but which you warranty is free of deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.
  9. Incaution: No due diligence. That explanation you would give without self regulation self auditing and not compensating for human tendency to ‘fill in’ by assumption and prediction, loading nad framing.
  10. Dishonesty: Evading any due diligence: That explanation you would give with knowledge that your explanation is incomplete, biased, loaded, framed, conflated, inflated, and niether testimony nor testifiable.
  11. Deceit: That explanation you would give with the intent to mislead away from the truth, that is neither testimony nor tesitifiable, nor even excusable as the imprecision of ordinary language, or plausible deniability given our tendency to bias.
  12. Fraud: That explanation you would give with the intent to directly defraud, that is not testimony, testifiable, excusable, or plausible, because of the motive of self interest in the involuntary transfer of a private, semi-private, or institutional demonstrated interest from another or others to you, or you and yours.
  13. Sedition: That explanation you would give with intent to indirectly defraud or harm the common demonstrated interests of others, that is not testimony, testifiable, excusable, plausible because of the motive of your intersts and others interest in committing that harm.
  14. Treason: That explanation you would give with intent to indirectly defraud or harm the common demonstrated interests of others, for the benefit of others external to the polity, that is not testimony, testifiable, excusable, plausible because of the motive of your intersts and others interest in committing that harm.

THEREFORE;

In summary, Truth consists of testimony sufficient for the satisfaction of demand for decidability in the context in question, given the consequences and liability for error. And therefore truth consists of insurance of preservation of self determination by sovereignty reciprocity.

WHERE;

Honesty, due diligence, truthfulness, testifiability, decidability, liability and warranty, used together, defend against the Series of Irreciprocities within the limits of Sufficiency for Decidability (Meaning, who is to be harmed and by how much).

AND;
1.3.4 – IRRECIPROCITIES

WHERE;

Irreciprocity consists in:
Involuntary net decrease in inventory of individual and ingroup demonstrated interests by the asymmetry of knowledge, and evasion of insurance and liability,

BY TESTS OF:

DIMENSIONS OF IRRECIPROCITY:

Inventory:
… Not Productive, producing a net decrease in demonstrated interests;

Knowledge:
… Not Fully informed,
… … by witholding information,
… … … including Forseeable Risks
… … … including Baitings into Hazard (Baitings into Hazard)
… … … … thereby producing a Symmetry of knowledge;
… … … … … Regardless of cost;

Volition:
… Coercive. Not Voluntary(and Subjective) Transfer (or exchange);
… … of Demonstrated (and objective) Interests
… … … Not Free of Imposition of costs
… … … … Upon the Demonstrated Interests of Others;
… … … … … Either Directly or indirectly by Externality

Insurance:
… Not sufficient given the limit of possible due diligence (by the actors); 
(Reasonable is a generalization (arbitrary, suggestable average), and possible refers to a particular individual or group, therefore we use ‘possible’.)
… Not sufficient to limit the incentive for in-group defection (proportionality);
… Not within the limit of the Utility of ingroup Future Cooperation with outgroups;
… And not liable and warrantied,
… … or not within the limits of restitutability;

Therefore (Consequences of ):
… Not Eliminating the incentive of retaliation and retaliation cycles,
… … And thereby imposing costs upon the commons of trust by which all ingroup cooperate;
… … And thereby Inhibiting or preventing the knowledge and incentive to cooperate, and gain the continous benefits of continued ingroup cooperation.
… … And thereby Inhibiting the Velocity of cooperation, innovation, adaptation, and evolution, and the prosperity that results from that velocity)

For the  Purpose (Motive, Intention, intended consequence) of:

  1. Advancing an interest
  2. Obtaining an interest
  3. Preserving an interest 
  4. Transferring an interest
  5. Harming an Interest
  6. Destroying an Interest of others

By Imposition of Costs upon Demonstrated Interests:

  1. Natural Interests
  2. Acquired Interests (obtained)
  3. Common Interests

Within The Legitimacy (Insurability Under Sovereignty and Reciprocity) of those Demonstrated Interests:

NOTE: Given that demonstrating an interest includes defense of an interest, and given people retaliate against an imposition of costs upon an interest whether it’s legitimate or not, insurers will only insure legitimate demonstrated interests, and not illegitimate interests whether demonstrated or not. 

  1. Legitimate Interest (Natural)
    • Demonstrated Interests:
      • Costs born to obtain an interest without imposing a cost upon the demonstrated interests of others
  2. Illegitimate Interest (Natural)
    • Undemonstrated Interests
      • Presuming an interest without imposing a costs upon the demonstrated interests of others.
    • Unmaintained Interests
      • Failure of defense, failure of maintenance, abandonment of an interest. (“denial of usus and fructus producing abusus”)
    • CriminallyObtained Interests
      • Costs born to obtain the control of or benefits of an interest by the imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others whether legitimate or not.

Using the three means of coercion (against demonstrated interests):

  1. Physical: Force vs Defense: Resulting in Destructive (violence)
  2. Material: Remuneration vs Boycott: Resulting in Extractive (trades)
  3. Social: Insurance vs Ostracization: Resulting in Seditious (words)

Conveyed By:

  • Deception by Abuse of:
    • Ignorance
    • Error
    • Bias
    • Information
  • Threat by:
    • Undermining
    • Deprivation
    • Physical Force
  • Harm By:
    • Undermining
    • Deprivation
    • Physical Force

Using The Degree of Direction to Indirection of relation:

  1. Destructive: Physical Harm for personal gain. (Direct Personal)
  2. Unethical: Harm by abuse of interpersonal asymmetry of information. (indirect interpersonal)
  3. Immoral: Harm by abuse of total public asymmetry of information. (Indirect social)
  4. Evil: Harm by intention regardless of personal gain. (Indirect Political)

Motivated by the Spectrum of Causes of one’s behavior consists of:
(provide decidability between Cause, responsibility, blame, liability)

  1. Unpredictable
    1. Acts of Nature (Black Swans) (due diligence not possible)
    2. Accidental, despite due diligence,
  2. Incompetence (incapable of due diligence)
    1. Irresponsibility of Guardian or Ward
  3. Bias (Unconscious)
    1. A genetic predisposition to decieve, or harm
    2. Carrier of tradition and culture of deception, or harm.
    3. Carrier of and distributor of decepetion, or harm
  4. Failure of due diligence against deception, or harm (Irresponsible)
  5. Intent to decieve, or harm (Intentional)

BY MEANS OF:
The Spectrum of Actions:
Display > Word > Deed

  1. Display, Signal(information),
  2. Word(decption)
    1. Consciously and Intentionally or Unconsciously and Unintentionally Exploiting:
      1. One’s Own Knowledge, Biases, Ability
      2. Others’ Knowledge, Biases, Ability
  3. Deed(action) 

AND WHERE;
The Spectrum of Harms consists of:

1) Personal Irreciprocities

Destructive:

… (a) Murder: An unlawful killing of another human.
… (b) Harm, Damage, Imposition of a material cost an a demonstrated interest by harm to it.
… (c) Theft: Imposition of a material cost an a demonstrated interest by deprivation of it.

Unethical:

… (c) Fraud, Fraud by Omission, Fraud by Indirection, Baiting Into Hazard: Imposing a cost on a demonstrated interest by any of the means of deception – especially due to informational asymmetry.

2) Social Irreciprocities

Immoral:

… (d) Informational(normative): Undermining, Social Construction: Imposing a cost of the demonstrated interests of others, in particular on the status and reputation of others, organizations, ideas, policies, informal and formal institutions.…

… (e) Material: Free Riding, Socialization of Losses, Privatization of Commons: Obtaining benefit without compensating for the Using of, Taking the Fruits of, Abusing, Trasferrring, Harming, or Destroying a demonstrated interest of the commons, and without having been demonstrated by concurrent approval of such. 

… (f) Markets: External Labor Arbitrage, Market manipulation, Internal and External Financialism, monetary manipulation. Obtaining an irreciprocal benefit at the cost of the polity.

… (g) Institutional: Rent Seeking, Monopoly Seeking, Conspiracy, Statism/corporatism: Seeking or obtaining benefit by circumvention of reciprocity without contributing to the productivity of a transfer, by contrivance, conspiracy, corruption, or construction, either directly or indirectly, and whether private, semi private, or public.

3) Political Irreciprocities

Evil:

… (h) Institutional: Conversion (religion/ philosophy/ ideology/ pseudoscience): Sedition or Treason by conversion rather than integration, as performed by seduction, persuasion, coercion, policy, or force, used for undermining or replacing the informal institutions of the polity, whether information, habit, norm, tradition, value, informal institution, or formal institution, when such change creates greater deviation from the natural law, and the laws of nature. Especially when combined with baiting into hazard as a false promise of escaping nature’s laws.

… (i) Genetic: Displacement, Replacement (immigration/overbreeding): Sedition or Treason by encouragement, promotion, advocacy, assistance, participation, organization, or influence, in the reproduction, migration, or immigration of those who would impose costs whether temporary, sustaining, or permanent, on the demonstrated interests of the polity, especially given the disproportionate utility of ethnic homogeneity, ethic government, ethnocentirc government and policy, and other formal and informal institutions of the polity.  Or, the converse, producing the opposite by causing flight of the host ethnicity by the inability for the host to compenstae for the spectrum of costs imposed by the introduction of competing demonstrated interests, especially when those competing interests diverge further from the natural law and adaptation to the laws of nature.

… (j) Physical: War, Conquest: War consists of the sustained use of force, trade, economics, finance, policy, information, sedition, coercion, conversion, displacement, migration or immigration, designed to and used to impose costs on the demonstrated interests of the polity for the purpose of altering informal behavior or formal policy, where causing greater deviation from the natural law and laws of nature. Conquest consists of the use of the above to not only alter behavior and policy but to take control over the demonstrated interests of the people and alter their organization, purpose, and use.

THEREBY;
Harmful to the demonstrated Interests of:

  1. the commons(all) (externality)
  2. others (internality or externality), or
  3. another (internality or externality),
  4. self (via ward, or other responsible party)

THEREBY;
Producing a Conflict Relationship Between Parties:

  1. Political: Crime (on behalf of the polity)
  2. Civil: Tort (Harm on behalf of between coincidential parties)
  3. Contract: (Dispute loss on behalf of a Contractual relationship)

AND THEREBY;
Producing Harm Against The Markets for Cooperation:

  1. Survival
  2. Association
  3. Cooperation
  4. Reproduction* 
  5. Production (economy, consumption)
  6. Commons (capitalization)
  7. Polities (organization)
  8. Defense(War) (control)

AND
THEREFORE;
The Dimensions of Irreciprocity (Harm) consist of:

1. |Irreciprocity|: Inventory > Knowlege > Volition > Insurance > Consequence > Purposes > Cost > Coercions > Motivations > Actions

2. |Demonstrated Interests|: Natural(Personal) > Acquired > Common

3. |Legitimacy|: Legitimate (Demonstrated) > Illegitimate (Undemonstrated, Unmaintained, Criminally Obtained)

3. |Means of Harm:: Three Means of Coercion|: Force (Physical Harm, Theft, Extortion) > Remunitarive or Material (Frauds, Free Riding, Corruption) > Social (Underminings, Seditions, and Treasons)

4. |Conveyed By|: Deception > Threat > Harm

4. |Purpose: For Demonstrated Interests|: Advancing, Obtaining, Preserving, Transferring, Harming

5. |Motivation: to Harm|: Predisposition > Tradition and Culture > Carrier Distributor > Failure of Due Diligence > Intent

6: |Means of Action|: Display > Word > Deed

7. |Harms: Direct to Indirect|: Destructive > Unethical > Immoral > Evil

8. |Harms To|: Commons < Others < Another < Self

9. |Realtionship Between Parties| : Political Crime > Civil Tort > Contractual Dispute

10. |Scale of Harms|: Personal > Social > Political

11. |Harming Markets|: Survival > Association > Cooperation > Reproduction > Production (economy) > Commons > Polities > Defense(War)

 BY USE OF:

1.3.4.0 – Irreciprocities

  • 1.3.4.1 – “Failures of Due Diligence”
    By Means of:
    • 1.3.?.? – Ignorance
    • 1.3.?.? – Error
    • 1.3.?.? – Bias
    • 1.3.?.? – Deceit
  • 1.3.4.? – Deception
    By Use of:
    Means(Resources) > Methods(Strategy) > Techniques(Tactics > Application)
    • 1.3.4.? – Means
      • Illogical > Irrational > Immoral > Criminal > Seditious (scale inside the group) > Treasonous (scale outside the group)
    • 1.3.4.2 – Methods of Deception (categories) by breaches of
      • Logic (Intuitionistic)
      • Testifiability (Verbal)
      • Rationality (Incentives)
      • Agreement (Consent)
      • Responsibility (Morality)
      • Demonstrated Interests (Crime)
    • 1.3.4.3 Techniques of Deception
      • Due Diligence
      • Logical 
      • Rational
      • Evasion
      • Moral
      • Coherence
  • 1.3.4.4 – Threats
    • coercions
  • 1.3.4.5 – Force
    • Criminal
  • 1.3.4.6 – Seditions
    • Seditious 
  • 1.3.4.7 – Treasons
    • Treasonous

WHERE;

The Series of Irreciprocities that violate self determination by self determined means by reciprocal insurance of sovereignty in demonstrated interests and reciprocity in display word and deed consists of:

1.3.5 THE FAILURES OF DUE DILIGENCE AGAINST IRRECIPROCITY

The violation of reciprocity by one’s failure of due diligence in compensating for the human capacity and tendency for Ignorance, Error, Bias, And Deceit. Where Ignorance error bias and deciet consist of:

1.3.5.1 MEANS OF IGNORANCE 

Where one’s knowledge and faculties are insufficient, producing a false, illogical, or irreciprocal result – requiring correction.

|Ignorance|:  Inculturation(family, society) > Training(early ed) > Education(later ed) > Experience(applied)

1.3.5.2 MEANS OF ERROR

Where one’s faculties produce a false, inconsistent, or illogical, or irreciprocal result – requiring Correction

|Error|: Sensation(nervous system) > Perception (disambiguation, modeling, integration) > Auto Association (memory) > Prediction (time) > Instincts (biological valuation) > Intuition (experiential valuation) > Reasoning(wayfinding) > Rationalizing(justifying) > Logical(consistency) > Empirical(correspondence) > Calculative(permuation, inputs into outputs) > Computational(measurement, precision)

1.3.5.3 MEANS OF BIAS (failure of due diligence, error)

Where one’s intuitions and instincts are wrong(false, inapplicable) – Requiring:

|Self Regulation|: Self Reguation > Self Auditing > Self Correction.

Because of the human faculties of:

|Self or Autonomic Deception|: Embodiment > Anthropic bias > Memory bias > Predictive bias > Normalcy bias (self) > Social bias.

Our brains predict. They predict with what they can. They can only predict with whatever they know. They only know what they have learned. Brains learn sequentially in time. In utero they learn embodiment (proprioception), meaning where our body parts are in relation to one another, and how to coordinate them; how we feel in reaction to stimuli internal and external. How we percieve, imagine and think: the physical, intuitive, and cognitive. When we percieve the outside world, we have only one system of measurement: ourselves. So we predict the world from ourselves: by Anthropic bias and anthropomorphism. Our brains must predict quickly in time for our survival, so our memories evololved to seek efficiency. That efficiency is determined by our priorities, and our priorities by our various genetic and learned biases. So we predict using our memories as the system of measurement, and biasing our subsequent predictions and memories in favor of our existing memories and biases. And because our memories must generalized to be efficiently accessed and compared, this means we tend to predict those causes and effects that are consistent with our experience (normal) instead of predicting variations on normal and outliers.  And consequently we predict the minds of others are like our own – when they are not. And we predict the general thoughts, feelings, and behaviors of people in our class, society, country, civilization and outside of them in the broader world, are similar to our own – when they are not – and are often the opposite. And finally, given this sequence of accumulated biases and memories, we increase our resistance to changing our perception, understanding, prediction, and valuation of the world around us. And the reason is very simple: we can predict what we know better than what we don’t know. And we seek security in our predictions. And in many cases, we are willing to pretend imagine or engiange in magical thinking that the world is different from how it really is, in order to maintain our sense of control over our minds, ourselves, our lives, and our conditions becaue the work, uncertainty, discomfort, and fear we experience otherwise. This is the fundamental problem of neural economies.

Note: Causality: Given that the difference between our baises originates in a division of labor by time frame and number of people, or more simply, empathizing in time for a small number versus systematizing over time for a population, when negotiating terms of cooperation we’re trying to solve for an equilibrium between people who differ by solving the time series of problems given the time bias of perception of problems facing different individuals groups and factions.

The problem then, is that empathizing doesn’t scale to accumulated costs to the polity and systematizing doesn’t regard. adaptive costs to the least adaptive individuals. (women and children). In other words, regarding women and children as peers disregards them as women and children.

It’s not that systematizers are ignorant of or disregard adaptive costs, but that under normal conditions they wouldn’t force them to compete in the market (treat them as peers (or wards)).  

In most societies it’s both sexes that are anti-market. It’s the west where men take responsibility for the market and advance it. We accept that if we get out competed in the market that it’s a good for the commons, not something to retaliate against – the opposite of most societies.

Bias Versus Deceit

Bias is a property of the brain and mind, and deceit is a property of incentives and intention, even if that intention is to limit due diligence against that deception.

Given that the demarcation between bias and deceit is an internal property, we can’t observe the difference between bias and deceit in another unless there is a conflict between, or no relation between, the person’s biases and the harm done. (reasonable man nonsense) Therefore we must understand biases and eliminate them in order to determine deceit. To do so, we need motive. So motive decides. If the motive aligns with the bias. It may be bias. If not it’s deceit. And while overcoming bias is a skill, while overcoming deception is an act of will. Therefore we may choose to forgive bias in the less competent, even if not deceit.

|Biases|: Cognitive Bias(Urgency, Efficiency, Scarcity Ambiguity) > Sex Bias(origin > behavior > cooperation > acquisition > returns > reproductive causes > behavioral consequences > signals > Summary) > Scale Bias (Personality > Kinship > Capital > Class > Normative)

  1. Cognitive Bias.Our brains calculate differences – they are difference engines – so everything we experience and everything that draws our attention as a result, is biased to the similarity to and difference from our prior experiences. All biases are the result of the need for urgency in reaction, action, or decision, need for efficiency (generalization, auto associative, indexable(recoverable) of the neural economy, the ever present sarcity of the information necessary for decisions, and the ambiguity of information in the context in question given the causal density of information in the universe.

    Given that humans must make decisions in real time with limited information, there are four categories of bias: Urgency, Efficiency, Scarcity, and Ambiguity.
    1. Urgency Bias: Need To Act In Time (Insufficient information problem)
      1. Attention is biased to the most present and urgent object of our attention.
      2. Attention is biased to the most simple unambiguous properties.
      3. Attention is biased to whatever we’ve already invested effort into.
      4. Attention is biased away from whatever is irreversible and will expose us to status risk, or social risk.
    2. Efficiency Bias: Need to Remember (Selection of meaning problem)
      1. Memories are stored by novelty and emotional valence (intensity)
      2. Memories are reduced to the minimum outstanding properties for differentiation
      3. Memories are stored by generalizations for broadest association, by eliminating details.
      4. Memories are edited after the fact to assist in generalization for broadest association and utility in pursuit of wants, needs, priors.
    3. Scarcity Bias: Insufficiency of Associations (Insufficient meaning problem)
      1. We assume our thoughts, intuitions, and feelings the average – default measure bias. (generalization by projection)
      2. We assume we understand the thoughts of others more so than we do or can. (interpersonal and social empathic, sympathetic, cognitive generalization)
      3. We assume people, places, things, and events we are familiar with are more valuable or better than the unfamiliar. (Familiarity Generalization of Valence. “Novelty in identity but regularity in quality”)
      4. We substitute memories, generalizations, and stereotypes for people, places, things, and episodes when we lack information. (Recall for Generalization)
      5. We identify patterns that aren’t there in sparse information (Pattern projection for generalization) 
      6. We simplify numbers and probabilities for efficiency (Generalization by Reduction)
    4. Ambiguity Bias: Overload of Information (Inability to derive meaning problem)
      1. We identify whatever is already primed in memory (context) and most familiar. (familiarity bias)
      2. We identify and attribute value to detail that confirms our priors (familiarity bias).
      3. When we identify a novelty or change we compare it by prior contexts (generalization) rather than in isoation in its context.(Anchoring, familiarity bias)
      4. We identify novel gains (rewards) and losses (punishments), attribute higher value to these novelty, and they serve as indexes for memories.
        1. Novelties (Positive). Especially when those gains are humorous, stimulating, or anthropomorphic (surprises).
        2. Flaws (Negative). We notice and attribute higher valence to the flaws of others that we would ignore or overlook in ourselves.
  2. Sex Bias: The Sexes differ in biases:
    1. All human behaviororiginates with the demand for:
      1. acquisition (+),
      2. retention (=), and
      3. consumption (-).
    2. And the resultingbehavior is a bias toward the greatest return, at the lowest cost, in the shortest time with the lowest risk, and the greatest certainty:
      1. Returns,
      2. Cost,
      3. Time,
      4. Risk,
      5. Certainty.
    3. Cooperation is disproportionately more rewarding than non cooperation in time, and cooperation is necessary for survival over time.
    4. Acquisition with or without cooperation carries a sequence of costs and risks:
      1. Acquisitive (Productive(+)),
      2. Signaling (Reproductive)==)),
      3. Opportunity, (Cooperative(++)),
      4. Conflict(Harm(–))
    5. Sexes differ in bias for returns, because Cost, Signaling Cost, and Opportunity Cost vary between the sexes:
      1. Productive costs
      2. Reproductive costs
      3. Cooperative costs
      4. Conflict costs.
    6. The ReproductiveCause of those biases (In Time vs Over Time, Demand vs Supply):
      1. Female vs Male Role
      2. Mass vs Speed
      3. Demand vs Supply
      4. In Time vs Over Time
      5. Reproductive Value vs Reproductive Expendability
      6. Low Risk Tolerance vs High risk Tolerance
      7. Reactive (Impulsivity) vs Active (Self Regulation)
      8. Internalization vs Externalization
      9. Prey vs Predator
    7. The Behavioral consequences that result from those causes(in time vs over time, demand vs supply)
      1. Interal (offspring) vs External (environment)
      2. Small Scale vs Large Scale
      3. Hyperconsumption vs Capitalization
      4. Emotional(Experiences) vs Physical(Outcomes)
      5. Desirable(Optimistic,Preference) vs Empirical(Pessimistic,true/false)
      6. Empathizing in Time(Experiences) vs Systematizing Over Time(outcomes)
      7. Interpersonal and Social vs Political and Material
      8. Seeking status evading responsibility for commons and obtaining resources by proxy, vs seeking for status by responsibility for commons.
      9. Presumption of equality (vs distribution)
      10. Conceiving a Line (equality) by Priority of Outliers (NAXALT) or the Inverse(AXALT) vs Concieving a Distribution (Generalization)
      11. Equating and Prioritizing Approval/Disapproval over True/False vs Disambiguating and prioritizing True/False over Approval/Disapproval.
      12. Denying, Outraging, Undermining vs Proposing a Counter Argument (“GSRRM”)
      13. Oppression myth vs Conspiracy Myth
      14. Social Undermining vs Physical Harming
      15. Sedition and Treason vs Civil War and War
    8. The Signaling behavior that results is (in time vs over time):
      1. Consumption (Redistributive) vs Capitalization (Productive)
      2. Being In time vs Doing Over Time
      3. Devotion in Time vs Loyalty Over Time
        1. Offspring Responsibility vs Political Responsibiity
        2. Non Aggression(Submission) vs Non-Submission(Aggression)
        3. Virtue Signaling vs Virtue Demonstrating
        4. Conformity(equalitarian herd) vs Duty(hierarchical pack)
    9. Summarized As:
      Feminine      , prey, empathizing, in-time, hyperconsumption and status by evasion of responsibility for the common and externalization of responsibility for the common in exchange for opportunity for access to consumption by proxy.
      vs
      Masculine predator, systematizing, over time, capitalization, and status by responsibility seeking and accumulation of responsibility for the commons in exchange or access to opportunity and reproduction.
  3. Scale Biases
    1. Personality Bias (myself, demonstrated, acquisitional)
    2. Kinship Bias (family, demonstrated, defensive)
    3. Moral(Political Bias) (community, signaling but not demonstrated)
      1. Suffering, Purity, Reciprocity, Hierarchy. 
      2. Individual Empathizing
        1. Care/Harm (prey, empathizing, small scale, in time, non aggression, asking for action and resources)
        2. Fairness/Cheating
          1. Equality vs Proportionality (empathizing, systematizing, scale, meritless(child) meritocracy(adult,political))
        3. Liberty/Oppression
          1. Oppression vs Conspiracy
      3. Group Systematizing
        1. Loyalty/Betrayal
        2. Authority/Subversion
        3. Sanctity/Degradation,
    4. Capital Bias (by market value)
      1. Association
      2. Cooperation
      3. Reproduction
      4. Production
      5. Commons
      6. Polities
      7. War
    5. Class Bias (class)
      Class: What capital (responsibility) do you control and over how many generations (rotations)?
      While there is a linear relationship between Genetic > Social > Economic classes, because of genetic recombination, education, and economic outcomes, the result is a triangular relationship between Genetic, Social, and Economic classess. Which may be more easily understood as a stacked set of bars for each class. In other words there is little rotation between the classes other than temporary economic rotation largely in and out of the middle classes.
      However in the most general terms, one’s class is determined by one’s genetic capacity to carry capital responsibililty for demonstrated interests of self, family, and others. But that capacity may be put to good(producing, capitalizing) or ill(parasitic) ends. Ergo class isn’t a moral property, but a resource that can be put to moral or immoral ends.
      1. Genetic Class (low or no rotation: Including outlier Aesthetic Elites)
      2. Popular Class (high rotation)
      3. Economic Class (Medium rotation, including Private Sector Elites)
      4. Political Class (High rotation, Temporary Military and Political Elites)
      5. Social Class (Low rotation, including intergenerational families,  Occupational Elites, Nobility, Ruling Elites)
    6. Normative (civilizational,institutional Bias) (polity)
      What responsibility (defense, decidabilty) for capital are all members of the polity held to by one another, by adherence to group strategy, institutions, traditions, norms, values, and habits. And more specifically, what institutions of behavior in expression of responsibility, accountability, liability for capital do the civilization or polity enforce by interpersonal, social, political, and juridical means.
      1. Group Strategy
        1. Demographic Distribution, meaning degree of neotenic evolution and resulting ratio between classes given the responsibilities each class is capable of demonstrating.
        2. Geography especially fertility of land, waterways, and climate.
        3. Resources such as plants, animals, water, minerals.
        4. Homogeneity limits conflict and encourages prosociality where heterogeniety increase conflict and discourages prosociality – especially political prosociality.
        5. Competitors whether peers, more developed, or less, more civilizationally and ethnically different or less, determine much of our world view.
        6. Relationship between the founding aristocracy and the working classes, which can be predatory (middle east) managerial (china), responsible (europe), or almost non existent and tribal (africa).
      2. Means of Propagation of Strategy
        1. Metaphysical Presumptions about our relationship to, and the value of: one another, the sexes, families, classes, institutions, outgroups(others), nature, and the universe.
        2. Language to contain paradigm, concepts, and weights(values) of that strategy
        3. Myths to education, explain and perpetuate it by analogy 
        4. Means of argument and persuasion to enforce and defend it.
        5. Elites to specilize in it
        6. Institutions of elites to perpetuate it.
      3. Institutional (Cultural) Biases That result
        1. Geographical Biases: These biases are influenced by the geographical conditions and locations of a civilization. They can include biases related to climate, natural resources, and attitudes towards different geographical regions or environments.
        2. Historical Biases: These biases are shaped by the historical experiences and narratives of a civilization. They can include biases related to historical events, historical figures, and attitudes towards different historical periods or civilizations.
        3. Cultural Biases: biases related to language, customs, traditions, and values. These biases require defense of cultural capital, that forms a system of measurement to which all are required to conform.
        4. Societal Biases: biases that can include gender biases, age biases, and biases related to social class or caste. These biases require defense of social organzing capital: cooperation between our differences.
        5. Religious Biases: These biases are influenced by the religious beliefs and practices of a civilization. They can include biases related to religious affiliation, religious doctrines, and attitudes towards different religions or religious groups.
        6. Economic Biases: biases are influenced by the economic conditions and structures of a civilization. They can include biases related to wealth, income, occupation, and economic inequality. These biases require defense of economic merit within the limits by which economic merit creates friction between the classes harming cultural social, political, and economic capital.
        7. Political Biases: biases are shaped by the political systems, ideologies, and conflicts of a civilization. They can include biases related to political affiliation, nationalism, and attitudes towards different forms of government. These biases require defense of the capital in political institutions meaning the power structure that allows the organization of individuals, sexes, classes, elites, and institutions.

AND
1.3.5.4 MEANS OF DECEIT (DECEPTION)
WHERE;

Where one’s intentions and intuitions are irreciprocal – requiring Correction and Punishment.

Means 

|Means of Deception|:  Illogical > Irrational > Immoral > Criminal > Seditious (scale inside the group) > Treasonous (scale outside the group)

This sequence represents a progression and escalation of deceptive behaviors, starting from relatively minor infractions and moving towards more serious and harmful actions:

  1. Illogical: This is the least severe form of deception in this sequence. It involves using arguments or reasoning that doesn’t follow logical principles. 
  2. Irrational: This refers to behavior or thinking that is not based on sound reasoning or judgment. Irrational deception might involve making decisions or arguments that go against evidence or reason, often driven by emotions, biases, or misconceptions.
  3. Immoral: This level of deception involves actions that are considered wrong or unethical according to societal or individual moral standards. Immoral deception might involve lying, cheating, or other actions that intentionally harm others or violate their rights.
  4. Criminal: This refers to deception that is not only unethical but also illegal. Criminal deception involves actions that are against the law, such as fraud, theft, or other forms of dishonesty that are punishable by law.
  5. Seditious (scale inside the group): This level of deception involves actions that incite or promote rebellion against the authority, government, or established order within a group or society. Seditious deception is a serious offense as it threatens the stability and harmony of the group from within.
  6. Treasonous (scale outside the group): This is the most severe form of deception in this sequence. Treason involves betraying one’s country or group by aiding its enemies or attempting to overthrow its government. Treasonous deception is one of the most serious crimes, as it involves a betrayal of trust and can lead to significant harm to the group or society.

Where Motive for the Spectrum of Deceptions can be categorized as:

  1. White Lies: Preservation or construction of an emotional (status, relationship) debt or credit.
  2. Grey Lies: Protecting interests from liability due to accidental harm to others’ interests.
  3. Black Lies: Gaining an interest by intentional destruction or transfer of another’s interests.
  4. Red Lies: Causing harm to others’ interest for the purpose of causing harm rather than gaining interest for one’s self
AND;
TECHNIQUES OF DECEIT

I. Failure of Due Diligence (Carelessness)

Purpose 

The purpose of due-diligence is to maintain reciprocal insurance of self determination, sovereignty, and reciprocity, by deliberate defense against one’s own ignorance, error, bias, and wishful thinking, where failure of due diligence violates the requirement for reciprocal insurance, and therefore one’s reciprocal insurance by othres.

Methods

  1. Ignorance and Willful Ignorance;
  2. Mistake (Oversight) and Error (Understanding, Reasoning);
  3. Bias and Wishful Thinking;

II. Logical – Breach of Logic: (How)

Purpose

The purpose of a breach of logic is to deny, obscure, interfere with,  substitute or exaggerate causal relationships, using suggestion, to replace logical inference and deduction with non-logical inference and deduction.

Methods

  1. Denial (denying): Denying Causality
  2. Inquality(lying): Creating a False Causality (additive)
  3. Redirection and Deflection (Evading): Evading Causality
  4. Reversal(Reflecting): Inverting Causality (Substituting)
  5. Omission (Withholding): Obscuring Causality (Removing)
  6. Conflation(Confusing): Conflating Causality (Mixing)
  7. Inflation(Overloading): Overloading of Causality (Diluting)

Techniques

  1. Contradiction
    1. Falsehood: False assertion (?)
    2. Denial: Contradiction of a true assertion
  2. Abuse of Category (Categorical Conflation):
    1. Reductive(-): Implies properties of members of a subcategory are properties of the whole category.
    2. Expansive(+): Implies shared properties of members of a category are an exhaustive list of shared properties of a subcategory.
    3. Conflationary(!=): Implies two categories are equivalent when properties of their members differ.
  3. Abuse of Vocabulary (Term Conflation)
    1. Dissociative(-): Use two words with the same meaning as if they have a different one
    2. Associative(!=): Uses two words with a different meaning as if they have the same one.
    3. Substitutive(+): Replaces a meaning of a commonly used (typically ambiguous) word with a different meaning to transfer connotations.
  4. Abuse of Context (Sets, Facts):
    1. Loading (emotions): Biasing emotional valence. Using phrases or words that evoke strong emotions that bias the audience.
    2. Framing (facts), Re-Framing (isn’t it all framing?)
    3. Anchoring (premises): introducing a context and then interpreting all subsequent information in relation to it. In other words, treating a concept or context as a premise rather than just another fact, weight, or concern like any other. Especially to divert priority from the original question to the anchor.
    4. Obscurantism: Withholding information Preventing correct inference.
    5. Conflating: creating ambiguity by merging or blending two or more different terms, concepts, or arguments into one, causing confusion or misunderstanding, by obscuring distinctions between them.
    6. Suggestion: Suggesting properties. Causing inference by the audience. Gesturing or stating only part of the phrase, sentence, narrative, or argument, leaving the cause or consequence to be assumed by the audience. Especially when seeking agreement without providing sufficient detail to bring to attention disagreements that would be understood otherwise.
    7. Cherry-picking: Emphasizing some properties, deemphasizing or ignoring others.
    8. Half-Truth: Emphasizing some properties and obscuring others. Where a portion of the narrative is correct but another is not. Framing by stating some properties, subtracting some properties, and adding false properties.
    9. False n-chotomy: Obscuring possible contexts. Frames the situation as if it has n solutions when it has more than n.
    10. Default option: Presents an option as the default one though it otherwise wouldn’t have been.
    11. Strawmanning: Portraying competing options as different and thus less desirable than they actually are.
  5. Abuse of Standards (Measurments):
    1. False Equivalency (claiming unequal properties) comparing two thing based on superficial similarities or shared characteristics, without taking into account their important differences. Or when two things are compared based on irrelevant factors, or when the comparison is made without considering the broader context or underlying assumptions.
    2. Double Standards: Applying different standards while claiming to use the same one.
    3. Conflating Standards: Mixing or Reversing standards as if they are one.
    4. Hypocrisy: Holding other people(s) up to a standard that one or one’s own group doesn’t demonstrate.
    5. Relativism: Measuring by multiple different subjective standards where a single objective one applies.
    6. Absolutism: Applying the same standard where it isn’t applicable.
  6. Abuse of Distributions:
    1. NAXALT: Appeals to individual outliers or exceptions in an argument about a distribution, general rule, average or median.
    2. AXALT: Appeals to distributions, general rules or subsets as if they were absolute in an argument concerning particular individuals.
    3. Optimisms or Pessimisms as Medians (outliers) (an attempt to claim an optimistic or pessimistic outlier liklihoods, probabilities or possibilities of a distribution are more common than they are.)
    4. Hyperbole (scale), Exaggeration(facts), and Dramatization(emotions) 

III. Testifiable – Breach of Testifiability

Purpose

The purpose of a breach of testifiability is to deny, evade, obscure, substitute or exaggerate one or more of the eleven dimensions necessary to test for consistency and coherence in order to demonstrate by testimony a non-false truth claim.

Techniques

  1. Realism(Empiricism): claiming any form of existence that cannot be demonstrated by observation of persistence.
  2. Naturalism: claiming any form of causeality that cannot be demonstrated by observation of change by natural observable causes.
  3. Identity: Failing to disambiguate references whether existental (noun) or performrative (verb) or indifferent (agreememt)
  4. Logical Consistency: failing to demonstrate commonality of properties between two or more dependencies.
  5. Possibility: Failing to demonstrate operational possibility – causality between states..
  6. External Correspondence: Failing to demonstrate observable existence.
  7. Rationality: Failing to demonstrate rational incentives within the limits of bounded rationality: Disconnecting actions from self-interest.
  8. Reciprocity: Failing to demonstrate reciprocal bounded rationality as a consequence of any display word or deed.
  9. Limits: failing to state the boundary condition within which any claim is demonstrable.
  10. Full Accounting: failing to account for all conditions within the boundary conditions where the claim is demonstrable.
  11. Liability: failing to account for the demand for resititution if one’s claims are false and especially if they lead to harm to others’ demonstrated intersts.

IV. Rational – Breach of Rationality

Purpose

The purpose of a breach of Rationality is to overload one or more of the human faculties necessary to for tests of  identity, consistency correspondence, rationality, morality, and coherence, using justification, evasion pretense, or in order to force a bias in reasoning.

Faculties

  1. Physical Breach (display, deprive you of information)
  2. Intuitional Breach – all deceit (vs coercion) is an attempt to overload intuition which then impedes reason, choice, and action.
    1. Perceptual 
    2. Auto Associative (suggestion, loading, framing, obscuring, confusing, overloading) (objects, spaces, places, borders, locations)
    3. Predictive (episodes)
    4. Valuative (emotional, (personal, social))
      1. Measure: acquisition, preservation, exchange, consumption
        1. Demonstrated interests
      2. Costs (greatest return in the shortest time with the least effor at the greatest certainty at the lowest risk)
    5. Attentional
  3. Rational Breach (Wayfinding) (cognitive)
    1. Overloading by introduction of appeals to Authority, Morality, Pretense of knowledge, misinformation, or disinformation to prevent rational judgement based upon the facts and the incentives.

Methods

Methods used are:

  • Justification (!=)
  • Evasion (-)
  • Pretense of Knowledge (+)

Techniques

  1. Justification 
    (in context of discussing truth, rationality, reciprocity, probability and possibility):
    1. To Authority: Claiming that the authority of a particular individual, credentials or consensus/dogma, rather than the substance of the argument has bearing on the truth. A form of substitution and distraction where the individual cannot demonstrate his claims, but claims he understands those of some authority.
    2. To Nature: claiming because something emergedn in nature it is a relevant, a constraint, applicable, or even desirable in the circumstance, and as such bearing on the truth. (Naturalistic Fallacy)
    3. To Reasonableness (limiting to interpersonal): (an attempt to appeal to reasonableness between individuals in order to ignore externalities and scale effects: evading full accounting.)
    4. To Approval or Disapproval: claiming that approval of one’s self, particular individuals or group, have bearing on truth.
    5. To Trust instead of Truth: A claim of knowledge, neutrality, advocacy and trustworthiness, credibility, or likability rather than providing evidence. 
    6. To Emotion: Appealing to empathy in time in the form of feelings, values, desires, fears, or sympathies of the audience, independent of the over-time cause, consequences, and externalities explained by the logic and evidence.
    7. To Face (Status, Reputation, Honor) A violation of reciprocity that requires truth-before-face regardless of cost to status, reputation, hiearchy, or honor, by lying to preserve status, reputation, hierarchy, or honor).
    8. To Morals, ethics or norms. Claiming morals ethics or norms have bearing on the truth, or when the question is more precise than general moral and ethical norms measure.
    9. To Fear Uncertainty and Doubt. the use of negative, vague, or false information to create feelings of fear, uncertainty, and doubt, thereby asymmetrically attributing risk to some choice or decision.
    10. To Personal effects: in context of incentives or effects on a larger group. Appealing to personal experience or empathy with others’ experience, despite the negative consequences to the broader group or society. (failure of systematizing)
    11. To Group effects: in the context of discussing actions limited to an individual or small group, claiming consequences or behavior will scale to a larger group. (Misapplication of the Kantian imperative)
  2. Evasion 
    1. Evasion of full or exhaustive accounting:
      1. Denying or obscuring costs to demonstrated interests.
      2. Denying or obscuring benefits to demonstrated interests.
      3. Denying or obscuring limits: Pretense that a short-term trend could continue while ignoring outside factors.
    2. Evading Parsimony
      1. Imparsimony: Using unnecessarily convoluted explanation where a simpler one is available.
      2. Overloading: Uses unnecessary volume, complexity and ambiguity in an argument to prevent target from modeling the proposition and testing the outcome in their minds.
    3. Evasion of Consistency
      1. Moving the Goalpost (changing requirements): changing the criteria or requirements of an argument after the initial criteria has been met or the original point has been addressed by shifting the standards or expectations.
      2. Motte and Bailey: (changing defensibility) presenting an easily defensible, but often weaker or less tenable position (the bailey), and when challenged, retreating to a more defensible, but less intuitive position (the motte).
      3. Special Pleading (victim, privilege, claiming exception to requirements.) A form of double standard, by claiming an exception for one’s position while not granting the same exception for others or opposing positions.
    4. Delay and Decieve (Wasting Time):
      1. Reversal of Responsibility: (Demanding Support) (evidence, redirection) Deception by Redirection, transferring the burden to to proof instead of falsification: asking for sources with no intention of accepting them if delivered, and most commonly without demonstrating the knowledge or competency of the subject sufficient to hold an objection.
      2. Feigning Ignorance: (Playing a Hatchling) (Denial, Evasion): Deception by feigning ignorance of widely accepted facts to force the other side of the argument to explain in detail.
      3. Sedation (by Faith Healing): delaying into hazard. Faith Healing consists of providing temporary psychological relief while allowing the cause to persist, grow, and evolve.
  3. Pretense
    1. Pretense of Knowledge (Camouflage): (knowledge). Pretending one possess knowledge, skill, experience, that one cannot demonstrate.
    2. Pretense of Character (Costuming): pretending character virtue, morality, class, or status one does not demonstrate.
    3. Pretense of Authority (Impersonation): (Credibility) Appeal to Self as Authority: Pretending one possesses achievement, credibility, mastery, license, credential, responsibiilty, insurance or liability one cannot demonstrate.

V. Moral – Breach of Responsibility

Purpose

The purpose of a breach of Responsibility is to redirect responsibility, blame, and liability to another party.

Methods

Methods used are:

  • Deflection (!=)
  • Redirection (!=)
  • Invalidation (!=)
  • Undermining (-)
  • Subversion (-)
  • Accusation (+)
  • Reputation Destruction (+)

Techniques

  1. Redirection of Responsbility: (redirection, of responsibility?):
    1. Deflection: Attempt to cause accuser and audience to think and/or talk about something irrelevant.
    2. Reflection: A form of accusation by attempting to cause the accuser to appear as the offending party in the situation in the minds of the audience.
    3. Reversal: (Reversing Responsibility): A form of accusation or jusitification, Claiming victimhood instead of accepting blame.
    4. Projection: A form of justification or accusation by attempting to claim one’s thoughts, feelings, motives, beliefs or other characteristics are or were thought by, felt by, or motivated others.
  2. Undermining (credibility, interpersonal)
    1. Ridiculing (dismissal, evasion, responsibility) redirecting the argument from the subject at hand to the individual’s character, thoughts, argument, actions or motivations, in an attempt to undermine the individual’s credibility rather than address his argument. 
    2. Shaming (accusation, social, morality) redirecting the argument from the subject at hand to the individual’s character, by accusing the individual of violating ethical or moral norms, to undermine the individuals credibility.
    3. Insulting (accusation, personal, emotional): undermining an individual’s self-esteem, dignity, reputation, or status – often with the intent to provoke anger, humiliation, or emotional distress – by offense, belittling, or disrespect usingwords, gestures, or actions. 
      AND;
    4. Psychologizing (psychological): underming by attributing one’s behavior to psychological or emotional motives rather than rational incentives given the evidence available (rational choice)
    5. Gaslighting (rational): (inequality, overloading) undermine one’s perception of reality, memory, or sanity, as accusation of irrationality.
    6. Oppression or Conspiracy Accusation (loyalty): Undermine one’s perception of reality by claiming one’s complaint about the behavior of a group or organization that’s attributable to rational incentives is intentional oppression or conspiracy instead – a misattribution by an accusation of irrationality.
      OR
      Reversal (Denying): Denying intentional oppression or conspiracy by denying the existence of rational incentives to conspire or oppress.
      BY
      Definitions: Oppression narratives tend to personalize and attribute  rational incentives to emotional or psychological motives, while Conspiracy narratives tend to politicize and attribute intention to rational practical incentives regardless of intent.
      AND;
    7. Moralizing: accusation of defection by imposing one’s own moral values, beliefs, or standards onto others as if a universal standard of measurment rather than a pragmatic bias.
    8. Outraging (emotional overloading): distraction by hyperbolic emotion as an accusation of defection by demonstrating a strong emotional reaction using anger, personal indignation, or moral indignation in response to a perceived injustice, wrongdoing, or offensive action. 
    9. Catastrophizing (consequential overloading): distraction by hyperbolic argument as a dramatic exaggeration of consequences of a behavior claiming outcomes will be worse than rationally predicted given historical evidence.
    10. Shrilling, Shrewing, Scolding (ill temper, personal, overloading discourse or argument): distraction by hyperbolic emotional disapproval and complaint (a) shrill or shrilling can be used to describe a way of arguing or criticizing that seems too forceful, passionate, agitated, loud, and outrageous (b) shrilling was a term used in anglo saxon and early english common law to refer to “gossips and shrills and shrews”, which was a crime, usually attributed to women, whose repeated behavior created social discord and ‘broke the kings peace’. (Contemporary vernacular uses the term “Karen”, disparaging a fine Danish name.) (c) Shrew or Shrewing and Scold or Scolding can be used to describe a way of undermining by ill tempered quarreling, nagging, criticizing, scolding by negative emotional loading.
    11. Shouting Down: interrupting, over-talking, or loudly disagreeing with an opponent to the point where they cannot make their point heard, or to deter them from speaking at all.
  3. Subversion (And Pretense) (personal):
    False Accusation of Disloyalty or Defection, or False Lionizing and Inclusion.
    1. Status-seeking:
      1. False admiration: Portraying a behavior as high status by portraying people who demonstrate it as admired when in reality, they aren’t.
      2. False shame: Portraying a behavior as low status by portraying people who demonstrate it as shamed when in reality, they aren’t.
    2. Morality:
      1. False virtue: Portraying an action as moral by portraying outcomes of it as good for self and ingroup when in reality, they aren’t.
      2. False vice: Portraying an action as immoral by portraying outcomes of it as bad for self and ingroup when in reality, they aren’t.
      3. Inversion: Combination of the above, portrays vices as virtues and any institutional, social and normative limits on them as unnecessary and immoral oppression.
      4. False martyrdom: Portrays suffering or dying of an individual or a group as due to some moral cause or acting against oppression while omitting bad behavior of the individual or group that merited retaliation.
    3. Loyalty:
      1. False ingroup: Portrays members of a different group as being part of the ingroup by falsely portraying it having shared values and interests rather than distinct, competing or outright hostile ones that they actually do.
      2. False outgroup: Portrays some members of an ingroup as having values and interests competing or hostile to the rest of the group which they actually don’t have.
      3. False enemy: Portrays an outgroup as having competing or hostile values and interests when in reality, it is neutral or may even be open to cooperation.
  4. Accusation
    1. Credibility Accusation (Ad Hominem): attacking the opponent’s character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their credibility.
    2. False Accusation: A combination of ad hominem where on attacks the opponent’s character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument, and Straw Manning where one intentionally misrepresents their opponent’s argument by exaggerating, misquoting, or completely fabricating their opponent’s argument. 
    3. Rolling False Accusation (change accusation, (Scott Adams’) ): continuously making new accusations or allegations without adequately addressing or substantiating the previous ones especially as each previous accusation is determined as false.
  5. Reputation Destruction (Social and Economic Scale)
    1. Interpersonal Gossiping (small scale, interpersonal): spreading private or sensitive information or rumors about someone or some group in order to influence others’ opinions or perceptions by undermining the their credibility or authority, or to shift the focus of the argument away from the main issues being discussed.
    2. Social Rallying (medium scale, social): compensating for one’s inability to win a debate or argument by calling otehrs to participate, thereby creating an appeal to popularity at best, and to overwhelm or shout down one’s ability to respond, or to threaten or produce violence.
    3. Social Undermining (large scale, social): activist interference in reputation in familial, social, economic, and political orders, causing harm to one’s opportunities for cooperation.
    4. Economic Cancelling (large scale social and economic): activist intererence that is organized to produce ostracization or boycott by organizations and institutions, particularly employment, banking and finance, and other necessary services, causing economic harm to the individual or group.

VI. Breach of Agreement/Disagreement (Consentually)

Purpose

The purpose of breaching an agreement, promise, or contract, is to gain Benefit or Advantage: at the other, or another party’s expense. Sometimes, a party might breach an agreement if they believe that doing so will provide them with a greater benefit or advantage than fulfilling the agreement would. This could involve pursuing a more lucrative opportunity, avoiding an earned loss, or capturing a unearned gain.

  1. Personal Gain: Breaching an agreement to pursue a more lucrative opportunity or to gain some form of personal advantage. 
  2. Harm or Sabotage: Breaching an agreement with the specific intent of causing harm to the other party. 
  3. Manipulation or Coercion: Breaching an agreement as a way to manipulate or coerce the other party into doing something. 
  4. Fraud: Entering into an agreement with no intention of fulfilling their obligations, but rather with the intent to defraud the other party. 

Method

Attacking the implied reciprocity of the terms of the agreement, promise, or contract – without compensating the other party for the losses encurred.

Techniques

  1. Denial: The party might deny that a breach occurred, or they might deny that the agreement was valid to begin with.
  2. Misrepresentation: The party might misrepresent the facts or circumstances surrounding the agreement or the breach. 
  3. Loopholes: Trying to exploit loopholes in the agreement or in the law to justify their breach. 
  4. Deflection: Shifting the blame onto the other party, or they might try to distract from the breach by bringing up unrelated issues. 
  5. Necessity: Necessity due to circumstances beyond their control. 
  6. Superior Opportunity: Arguing that they had a superior opportunity that they couldn’t forgo.

VII. Criminal – Breach of Demonstrated Interests

Purpose

The purpose of breaches of Demonstrated Interests is to obtain, transfer or harm the demonstrated interests of others either for direct gain by the obtaining interests, or for indirect gain by the imposition of harms and losses on the others’ interests.

Methods

  1. Material or Criminal breach (Personal)
  2. Moral or Ethical breach (Social)
  3. Loyalty, Sedition or Treason Breach (Political)
  4. Seduction
    1. False Promise
    2. Baiting Into Hazard
    3. Forgery and Fraud 
  5. Coercion

VIII. Social Sedition (Undermining, Soft Sedition)- Scaling Ingroup (political scale, institutional)

Purpose

The purpose of sedition againsts the Demonstrated Interests of others is to gain an indirect relative interest by imposting a cost on the informal or formal demonstrated interests of others: meaning informational, social and in particular, political commons. (Hayekian capital)

|Undermining|: Social > Political > Institutional > Treason

Methods

Warfare gainst informal and formal capital consists of undermining the trust in those institutions whether informational, social, or political, necessary by undermining the metaphysical presumptions that those institutions depende upon, thereby destroying the generations centuries and milennia that it has taken to develop that trust in those institutions – whenever those institutions are consistent with and correspond to the natural law of self determination by self determined means and consequent requiresments of insurance of sovereignty and reciprocity. 

In those cases where one undermines those institutions that are not consistent with and correspondent to that natural law, then sedition only occurs when it is not directed toward the production of a condition of natural law. When it is directed toward any solution other than natural law consists of sedition.

Those methods include:

  • Undermining Knowledge, Norms, Traditions,  Rules, Institutions by:
    • Overloading reason by disinformation
    • Loading and overloading biases moral and otherwise
    • Loading and overloading probability of risk-reward
    • Loading and overloading judgement by baiting into hazard
    • Underloading trust by pretense of innocence and plausible deniability

Techniques

  1. Disinformation (Assymmetry of knowledge systems beyond experience)
    1. Factual Disinformation (facts) Wholly or partially false content to overload decision making.
    2. Systemic Disinformation (context, systemic) pseudoscience, ideology, philosophy, religion, fictions to use a narrative to overload decision making.
    3. Social Construction (Large scale, Intertemporal, normative): repetition and promotion of a normative preference, bias, belief, whether factual, narrative, or argumentative to use environmental exposure to overload understanding, choice, and decision making.
    4. False Propaganda (large scale, temoral, political): systematic and deliberate dissemination of information, ideas, rumors, or other content, utilizing emotional appeals, loaded language, manipulation of facts or context, by biased or misleading means, by private but especially public actors, to promote a particular political cause or point of view, overloading facts and narratives, by both environmental saturation and pretesnse of knowledge, virtue, and authority.
    5. Institutional Construction (Indoctrination): formal institutional indoctrination into a specific set of beliefs or ideologies, instilled in an individual through repetitive exposure, teaching, and demand for repetition and demonstration.
  2. Overwhelming (Combinations, Complexity, Scale) (Asymmetry of evidence beyond perception)
    1. Fictioning (outright making it up)
      1. Fictions (a false narrative, explanation, or account that is deliberately created and presented as if it were true)
    2. Overloading (Volume Confusion) (adding properties) (volume, episodal confusion): the use of too many arguments, points, or evidedence in an attempt to overwhelm and confuse an opponent, render the opponent incapable of responding to all the open questions or criticisms, or to divert attention away from the central issue. 
      NOTE: Whenever the liar him or her self cannot handle the logic of his or her bias, he or she resorts to intuitionistic biases because he/she needs to? 
  3. Overwhelming Sex Differences In Cognitive Bias (Asymmetry of priority  of decidability within perception)

1. (Masculine) Fictionalisms: The Spectrum of Fictionalism:

BY:
a. Appeal to the External and physical (Idealism is a claim to physicality that’s false.)
b. Criteria of Decidability: True/False, then agreement or not on that basis.
c. Method of Decidability: Systematizing: Logical intuition confusion, overload decidability.
d. Authority of Decidability: Claiming speaker is or source or argument is the provides authoritative decidability.
e. Use In Civilization: In European, Indian, Chinese

BY:
1. The physical: Magic -> Pseudoscience, and
2. The verbal: Sophistry > Idealism (Philosophy), and
3. The Imaginary: Occult -> Supernaturalism (Theology);
4. The Calculative: Innumeracy -> Mathiness  (Quantitative Sophistry)

2. (Feminine) Moralisms (Mythicisms)

BY:
a. Appeal to the Internal: and emotional bias, intuitive bias, instinctual bias.
b. Criteria of Decidability: Desirable/Undesirable, Approval/Disapproval, Agreement/Disagreement, Good/Bad, Right/Wrong, regardless of whether true/false, reciprocal, meritocratic/proportional.
c. Method of Decidability: Empathizing : Emotional intuition confusion, overload valence, to overoad empathzing
d. Authority of Decidability: Claiming opponent’s not the authority/decidability, but the consensus or norms or other factors.
e. Use in Civilization: Semitic (MENA), African

BY:
1. (F) Pilpul (truth agreement vs consensus agreement confusion): a form of overloading by evading the truth, and truth before face, disapproval, disagreement, shame, or conflict, by attempting to obtain approval and agreement by appeal to reasonableness or utility independent of the truth: the inversion of true/false with agree/disagree. (Semitic)

2. (F) Critique (Undermining, strawmanning, and lionizing) (“Kitchen Sink” Confusion), by the combination of loading, framing, strawmanning, undermining, lionizing, half truth, and suggestion by evasion of providing an equally criticizable alternative argument causing the audiece to either ignore or substitute alternative solutions. (Semitic)
Critique consists of:

    1. Heaping of Undue Praise on Straw Men (+)
    2. Criticism by Straw Manning (-), and
    3. Evading stating intentions and goals, and
    4. Poisoning the Well (Polluting the Informational Commons) (!=)

IX. Political Sedition (Medium Sedition)

Purpose

The purpose of political sedition is to use lanaguage to challenge or disrupt the established political order or the Demonstrated Interests of a political entity, such as an informal institution, a formal institution, a bureaucracy, a government, or a state.

Political sedition can be seen as a strategy to alter the balance of power, either to benefit a particular group or individual, or to bring about broader social or political change. 

|Undermining|: Social > Political > Institutional > Treason

Method

This is often done with the aim of gaining an indirect relative interest by imposing a cost on the formal demonstrated interests of the political entity. This imposition of costs can take many forms, including destabilization, the spread of dissent, or the undermining of legitimacy, and therefore the authority necessary to influence public behavior to conform to institutional processes, rules, and laws.

Techniques

  1. Propaganda and Disinformation: Used to incite rebellion or discontent against the government, institutions, constitution, laws, traditions, customs..
  2. Subversion: Used to incite to rebellion or attempts to undermine the government, institutions, constitution, las, traditions, customs from within
  3. Promoting Social Division: used to incite violence or social unrest against the government, institutions, constitution, las, traditions, customs.

X. Institutional Sedition: Undermining Political Institutional Processes (Hard Sedition)

Purpose

The purpose of institutional sedition is to organize and concentrate capital, people, efforts, to undermine the legitimacy of individuals, processes, or institutions. 

|Undermining|: Social > Political > Institutional > Treason

Methods

  1. Political Corruption (Underming People): use of public office or power for personal, group, or political gain. 
  2. Undermining Political Processes: used to incite rebellion or attempts to undermine the government through procedural abuses.

Techniques

  1. Political Corruption
    1. The misuse of, inspiraction, or coercion of public office or power for personal, group, or political gain, in a way that imposes costs on others’ demonstrated interests without their voluntary consent.Here’s how different forms of political corruption can impose costs on ‘demonstrated interests’:
      1. Bribery: When a public official accepts, solicits, or extorts a bribe, they are essentially selling their decision-making power to the highest bidder. This imposes costs on the public interest, as decisions are made not based on what is best for the community or the nation, but on what benefits the official personally.
      2. Embezzlement and Theft: When public funds are stolen or misused, this directly imposes costs on the public, who have contributed these funds through taxes or other means with the expectation that they will be used for the public good.
      3. Nepotism and Favoritism: When jobs or benefits are given to friends or family members regardless of merit, this imposes costs on those who are more deserving but are overlooked due to their lack of personal connections.
      4. Fraud: When a public official engages in fraudulent activities, such as manipulating public contracts or misrepresenting public expenditures, this imposes costs on the public who are deceived and whose resources are misused.
      5. Abuse of Discretionary Power: When a public official uses their discretionary power to benefit themselves or their associates, this imposes costs on those who are adversely affected by these decisions.
      In each of these cases, the public official is violating the principle of reciprocity by imposing costs on others’ demonstrated interests without their voluntary consent, and often without full disclosure or honesty. This undermines trust in public institutions and can lead to social and economic harm.
  2. Lawfare: If it involves the use of legal systems to achieve objectives that harm the nation or aid its enemies.
    1. Abuse of Jurisdiction (Undermining Sovereignty of the People)
      1. Extraterritorial Application of Laws: Laws can be applied extraterritorially to impose costs on the demonstrated interests of individuals or entities in other jurisdictions.
      2. Use of International Law against an Opponent: International laws and norms can be invoked to constrain an opponent’s actions or to bring international pressure against them. This imposes costs on their demonstrated interests by limiting their options and potentially isolating them internationally.
    2. Abuse of Equal Protection Under The Law (Undermining Standing)
      1. Public Interest Litigation: This is a type of litigation undertaken to protect the public interest. While it can be used for noble causes, it can also be misused to advance a particular agenda or to impose costs on certain groups or individuals.
      2. Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPP): This involves filing lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition. This imposes costs on the demonstrated interests of those who are exercising their right to free speech.
      3. Legal Challenges to Legitimacy: Legal actions can be used to challenge the legitimacy of an opponent or their actions. This imposes costs on their demonstrated interests by damaging their reputation and standing.
      4. Legislation to Restrict Activities: Laws can be enacted that restrict the activities of certain groups or individuals, imposing costs on their demonstrated interests by limiting their freedom of action.
      5. Abuse of Regulatory Power: Use of Governments or powerful entities to abuse regulatory power to target certain groups or individuals, imposing costs on their demonstrated interests by creating legal and bureaucratic hurdles that limit their ability to operate effectively.
      6. Selective Enforcement of Laws: Selectively enforcing laws to target  or advantage certain groups or individuals, subjecting them to unequal treatment under the law.
      7. Misuse of Legal Protections: Legal protections, such as those provided by whistleblower laws or human rights laws, can be misused to protect individuals who are engaging in harmful activities. This imposes costs on the demonstrated interests of those who are harmed by these activities.
    3. Abuse of Defensive Laws
      1. Misuse of National Security Laws: Abuse of National security laws targetor advantage political opponents or allies, or suppress dissent.
      2. Weaponizing Intellectual Property Laws: Abuse of Intellectual property laws to aggressively stifle competition or to control information.
      3. Anti-Discrimination Laws: Abuse of anti-discrimination law designed to protect individuals from discrimination, they can also be misused to target or advantage certain groups or individuals.
        Note: The natural law requires we treat people equally in the resolution of disputes under the law but not equally in legislation that causes groups to conform to the law, by preserving the use of public legislation and private discrimination as a means of forcing integration, and preventing undesirable integration. As such anti-discrimination laws are a violation of the natural law.
      4. Misuse of Defamation Laws: Abuse of Defamation laws to silence critics or suppress free speech, imposing costs on the demonstrated interests of those who are targeted.
      5. Misuse of Privacy Laws: abuse of privacy laws to prevent the disclosure of information that is in the public interest, imposing costs on the demonstrated interests of the public.
    4. Abuse of Jurisprudence (Stalling Tactics)
      1. Judicial Activism: Judges or courts may interpret laws in ways that advance a particular political or social agenda, imposing costs on the demonstrated interests of those who are affected by these interpretations. (Circumvention of the Legislature and the sovereignty of the people.)
      2. Abuse of Legal Privilege: Use of the privileges granted to lawyers, prosecutors, such as the ability to file lawsuits or the protection of attorney-client privilege. (Abuse asymmetrical knowledge and privilege, meaning requality under the law under color of law.)
      3. Abuse of the Legal Process: Use of the legal process in ways that are not intended, such as filing frivolous motions or appeals. (Abuse of time and resources under color of law)
      4. Exploiting Legal Loopholes: use of exploitation of Legal loopholes to gain an advantage or to harm an opponent or opponents who are affected by these actions. (Abuse of the word of the against the spirit(intention) of the law.)
    5. Weaponizing the Body of the Court and the Word of Law Against its Spirit (Undermining incentives, time, and resources necessary to truthfullly reciprocally resolve a dispute).
    1. Legal Actions to Tie Up Resources: Use of lawsuits, legal actions or investigations, such that one can force an opponent to spend time, money, and other resources on legal defense, diverting their resources away from their primary objectives.
    2. Frivolous Lawsuits: Use of lawsuits that are initiated despite the fact that the claims have little to no chance of winning. The main purpose of such lawsuits is to drain the resources of the defendant and deter them from certain actions.
    3. Legal Doxxing: Use of legal tactics to reveal the identity of anonymous individuals on the internet, exposing them to potential harm or harassment.
    4. Legal Harassment: Use of legal processes to harass an individual or group, causing them distress or discomfort.
    5. Legal Threats and Intimidation: The threat of legal action can be used to intimidate or silence opponents, creating a climate of fear or uncertainty.

XI. Treason (Betrayal, Sabotage) – Scaling Outgroup (extra-institutional)

Purpose

The purpose of treason againsts the Demonstrated Interests of others is to gain an indirect relative interest by imposting a cost on the informal or formal demonstrated interests of others: meaning informational, social and in particular, political commons with the assistance of, or by furthreing the intersts of a third party – whether that party be imaginary, conceptual, an organization, a state, a people, or a religion; such that the capacity of the people to pursue self determination by self determined means is imposed upon, and worse, harmed by the tansfer or influence to other parties other than the polity.

Europeans, because of european historical context, have traditionally envisioned Treason as conspiracy to advantage a foreign state. Whereas, given the unification of the world by trade during the european age of discovery and tranportation, the influence of population migrations, corporations, finance, trade networks, cultural groups, religions, philosophies, ideologies, international organizations, states and civilizations, espectially the globalists, all can seek to produce vehicles that facilitate undermining of the self determination by self determined means of ethnicities, nations, states, federations, and civilizations.

As such, treason consists of providing assistance to any external informational, coceptual, private,  common, informal, or formal organization of any kind that would seek to undermine the self determination by self determined means of any polity, and in particular any polity seeking to advance to greater correspondence with the natural law. 

|Undermining|: Social > Political > Institutional > Treason

Actors: “The Talking Classes”

All actors in these sectors pursue the same strategies to achieve either sedition in their or their group’s interest, or treason that adds an foreign or hostile interests. (Note: So we are duplicating a bit for clarity)

  • State
  • Public Intellectuals
  • Academy
  • Media
  • Clerisy
  • Activists
  • The Disenfranchised
  • Advertisers
  • Corporations
  • Financial Sector

Methods

The categories of Political Corruption and Undermining Political Processes could potentially fall under either category, depending on the specifics of the actions and their intent and impact.

All of these categories consist of Warfare from within:

  1. Personal Treason
    1. Defection: Abandoning one’s country to join an enemy nation or organization, often taking sensitive information or skills with them.
  2. Political Treason
    1. Infiltration: Placing or being an agent within the government or a key institution with the intent to undermine it from within.
    2. Personnel Sabotage: Political Corruption (Above)
    3. Procdural Sabotage: Undermining Political Processes (Above)
    4. Economic Sabotage: If it involves deliberate damage to the nation’s economy to benefit a foreign power.
    5. Financial Treason: Manipulating or undermining the nation’s financial systems or economy for the benefit of foreign entities.
    6. Physical Sabotage: Damaging, destroying, or disrupting critical infrastructure, such as military installations, communication networks, or public utilities.
    7. Leadership Sabotage: Assassination or Attempted Assassination: Planning or carrying out an attack on a nation’s leaders or key officials.
    8. Judicial Treason: Manipulating the judicial system to undermine the rule of law or to favor foreign interests.
    9. Legislative Treason: Manipulating legislative processes or outcomes to undermine national interests or favor foreign entities.
    10. Executive Treason: Abusing executive powers to undermine national interests or favor foreign entities.
    11. Military Treason: Undermining the nation’s military capabilities, revealing military secrets, or aiding enemy combatants.
    12. Intelligence Treason (Espionage): Revealing classified intelligence information to foreign entities. 
  3. Educational Subversion: Manipulating educational institutions or curricula to indoctrinate students with views or beliefs that undermine national unity or loyalty.
    1. Academic Sabotage: Deliberately undermining the nation’s academic institutions, such as by spreading false information about them, damaging their reputations, or disrupting their operations.
    2. Curriculum Manipulation: Deliberately altering educational curricula to spread misinformation, propaganda, or ideologies that undermine national unity, values, or interests. This could include the promotion of harmful ideologies or the suppression of important historical or cultural information.
    3. Indoctrination: Using the education system to indoctrinate students with beliefs or ideologies that are harmful to the nation or that promote allegiance to foreign entities.
    4. Misuse of Research: This could involve using academic research in a way that harms the home country and benefits a foreign power. For example, an educator or researcher might intentionally direct their research towards areas that could provide a strategic advantage to a foreign power, or they might share sensitive research findings with foreign entities.
    5. Promotion of Harmful Ideologies: This could involve promoting ideologies that are harmful to the stability and security of the home country. For example, an educator might teach or promote extremist ideologies that encourage violence, discrimination, or other harmful behaviors.
    6. Subversion of National Identity: This could involve undermining the national identity or unity of a country. For example, an educator might teach a version of history that emphasizes divisions and conflicts within the country, fostering a sense of disunity and dissatisfaction.
    7. Promotion of Foreign Interests: This could involve promoting the interests of a foreign power over those of the home country. For example, an educator might consistently portray a foreign government or ideology in a positive light while denigrating their own country’s values and systems.
    8. Facilitation of Foreign Influence: This could involve facilitating the influence of a foreign power within the educational system. For example, an educator might allow a foreign government to fund research or programs that promote their interests, or to recruit students for activities that serve their goals.
    9. Propaganda: An educator could use their platform to spread propaganda for a foreign power. This could involve presenting biased or misleading information, suppressing critical viewpoints, or promoting divisive narratives.
    10. Recruitment: An educator could use their position to recruit others to the cause of a foreign power. This could involve identifying potential sympathizers, grooming them with propaganda, and connecting them with foreign agents or organizations.
    11. Espionage: Using educational institutions as a cover for espionage activities, such as recruiting students or faculty as spies, or conducting research for foreign entities that could harm national security.
    12. Censorship: Suppressing academic freedom or censoring educational content to prevent the dissemination of information that could be beneficial to the nation.
    13. Resource Diversion: Diverting educational resources to foreign entities or using them to support activities that undermine the nation.
    14. Sabotage: An educator could intentionally undermine important research or educational programs. This could be done subtly, such as by introducing errors or delays, or more overtly, such as by damaging equipment or resources.
    15. Brain Drain: Facilitating or encouraging the emigration of highly educated individuals to foreign countries, thereby depriving the nation of their skills and knowledge.
  4. Informational Treason
    1. Media Treason: Using media outlets to spread disinformation, propaganda, or to incite violence or rebellion.
    2. Informational Commons Sabotage: Propaganda: Spreading false or misleading information to sow discord, undermine public trust, or incite violence.
    3. Psychological Warfare: (“Demoralization”) Using tactics designed to manipulate, confuse, or demoralize the nation’s citizens or its military forces.
    4. Fomenting Discord: Pitting sexes, classes, regions, and denominations against one another.
    5. Promoting Secession: Advocating for or actively supporting a region’s secession from the nation without legal means.
    6. Populist Sabotage: Insurrection: Inciting or participating in a rebellion or uprising against the government.
  5. Cultural Treason: Actively working to undermine the nation’s cultural identity or unity, often with the goal of creating internal conflict.
    1. Historical Revisionism: Deliberately distorting or falsifying historical facts to undermine national unity or identity.
    2. Religious Treason: Using religious influence or institutions to undermine the government or incite rebellion.
  6. Scientific and Technological Treason
    1. Technological Treason: Stealing or transferring critical technology to foreign entities.
    2. Scientific Treason: Misusing scientific research for harmful purposes, or providing critical scientific knowledge or capabilities to foreign entities.
  7. Demographic Treason
    1. Demographic Treason: Manipulating demographic trends or data to destabilize the nation.
    2. Immigration Treason: Manipulating immigration policies or procedures to destabilize the nation.
  8. Biological Warfare
    1. Biological/Epidemiological Treason: Deliberately spreading harmful biological agents or diseases within the nation’s borders.
    2. Environmental Treason: Deliberately causing significant harm to the nation’s environment, potentially leading to long-term damage or instability.
  9. Diplomatic Treason: Abusing diplomatic powers or roles to undermine the nation’s interests or benefit foreign entities.
  10. Reverse Sabotage: Aiding the Enemy: Providing support to a nation’s enemies, which can include supplying them with weapons, funds, intelligence, or other forms of assistance.

THEREFORE
Rights Obligations and Inalienations whether natural or contractual, are dependent upon membership, and as such insurance of soveriegnty, reciprocity, truth, testimony, decidability, against irreciprocities.

NOTE: ( … ) CONVERT TO TRIFUNCTIONAL
Organization, Incentive, Agreement
Accountability, liability, and insurance (institutions, means, what)
Obligations, rights,  and inalienations (rules, means, how, requiremetns)
Agreements, Resolutions, Adjudications, (decidabilty,how, requirements )
Responsibilty Agency and Soveriengty (individuals, actors, why, input)
Self determination, Self Determined Means (ends, what)

AND
THEREFORE;
Reciprocal Insurance of Self Determination by Self Determined Means, by Sovereignty in demonstrated interest and Reciprocity in display word and deed requires prohibition on authority leaving only competitive (adversarial, market) evaluation, decidability and adjudicated by a jury of peers:

Authority(Discretion, exercise of power independent of responsibility and liability) vs Decidability (Deciability, responsibility for Decision making with liability and rsponsibility.) 

Was this page helpful?
Yes No

Leave a Reply

. . .