Social Positivist is an organization exposing the problems of open societies and existential security provider. Positivists subscribe to a philosophy of truth that is epistemologically logical and analytical. Truth is based on axiomatic coherent propositions. Social Positivist teaches the right how to deconstruct the lies of the left and insult the institutions, organizations and communities from the social diseases carried by open societies.
Who We Are
Social Positivist is existential security provider.
What We Do
Social Positivist provides security for communities, organizations and institutions.
How We Do It
Social Positivist educates and instructs individuals and organizations on the issue of open societies and existential security. Social Positivists introduces the student to epistemology and the corruption of truth by open societies. Social Positivist provides clients with analytical algorithms that strengthen security and reduce collectivity. Security increases specialization, progress and wealth. The tools that produce economic development and security are the same tools that destroy liberalism.
Every problem is a cost that someone created but did not pay. This is socialism. Socialism is poor accounting. Social costs creates threats of loss and risk for society and future generations. The creation of costs others must pay is a cost of religion. Socialism is a manifestation of Babylon. All religions falsify costs and infringes on ownership rights: might makes right is the credo of all religion. Social Positivists believe all persons have a right to be free of all religions.
Positivism is the philosophy of truth as logic. Positivity is a belief in truth as what is coherent. To be positive is to believe in the reality and absoluteness of truth. The only absolute truth is logical truth.
Truth has value and all value can be quantified. Truth has an economic component. Waste and liabilities create risk and threats of loss. Lies and acts of sabotage increase risk and pose a threat to security. Our level of security is a good indication as to the truth we are heir to.
To take up ones cross and follow Jesus means to transform faith into works. Works in this context is a mission governed by truth. Positivists believe those who pursue security will be this very means fulfill the will of He who formed us.
Those who create value have the right to own what they author. Liberals are a threat to good governance because they deny truth is logical. Liberals believe might makes right and ends justify means. Social justice is an end that warrants our inalienable right to own what we have created, being rescinded in support of a social agenda.
There is only one question to ask: Do we or do we not, own what we create and is this ownership position absolute and inalienable or is the rights of authorship revokable, rescindable and alienable? Do the priorities of a third party override the sovereign rights of the creator? Can an end fabricated by one agent override the rights of an individual creator? If so, there is no security and indeed, no objective, verifiable truth. All we have is opinion and the emotional trauma used to justify it. Justice, truth and morality are also impossible if the rights of some are permitted to remove the security of others.
Positivism is the philosophical positive that every truth can be scientifically verified and is open to analytical or mathematical proof. Positivists believe truth is analytical and logical. Positivists reject the unproven and unprovable assumption that nature is physical and discovered by observation using the senses.
Those who claim truth exists cannot prove the claim except by proving truth is analytical, and reality is inherently logically constructed.
Positivism is not solipsism. Logic is not sophistry. Logic is no more amenable to random thoughts, than an objective independent reality would be, if it existed.
Logic demands clear definitions. We think using concepts. Our reality is only as detailed as our conceptualization of it. If we cannot define the words we use or if we define them in a circular way our understanding of what we are talking about will be limited by the least understood term. Positivist thinking is the study of words and concepts to develop the most detailed and complete definition. Logic means we faithfully follow the implications that follow from a proposition.
Truth is inherent in our communication. If it can be communicated it is true. Lies are defined by their unintelligibility.
If we assume reality is implacably physical, the concept of god will be corrupted by the assumption. We cannot embrace the idea of a reality composed of matter, energy, space, and time and conceive of conceptual absolutes. Our idea of truth will therefore be contingent and synthetic and limited to what can be empirically verified.
There is then, two models of reality derived from two contradictory perspectives about what constitutes truth and how it is discovered. Is reality external to our minds or is reality our understanding of the concepts in which it is discussed? Is reality external to our knowledge or is it knowledge?
Either we believe truth is absolute and knowable or we think truth is alienated from us. Reason tells us there is no truth knowable by us beyond our physiological state. If our flesh does not react to it then it does not exist. Positivists reject the naturalist view. Truth is analytical and provable through analytical means.
Truth is information owned by the creator of the truth. No one else has the right to distort, embellish or destroy truth. Truth is protected by the inalienable rights of the creator of truth. This is the right we all have to security.
There is no end that justifies the means. It is not morally or ethically possible to contrive a social agenda or any other end to justify the destruction or distortion of truth. Security trumps ideology.
If truth is analytical, logic defines truth. If there is no logical truth, then what is true is defined by pathos. Progress comes from individuals making choices with the assets he has to produce equity in a market environment. If truth is a relative, then it is the collective that defines our values and objectivity is not possible.
Liberalism is defined by its particular response to threats or perceived threats. Unfortunately its perception of what constitutes a threat has more to do with its response than the objective structure of a threat.
Every division in society and every conflict exists because a cost created by one agent is externalized onto society and future generations. If you wish to understand conflict look at who is producing the wealth and who threatens it. Conflict can only be between different contenders over what someone created.
Creating costs society and future generations must pay, is not ethical. Alienating ownership from authors is unethical because it threatens security. Creating costs others must pay is evil. Evil threatens security, that is what evil is.
There is a clear line of demarcation between left and right. There is a clear line between the way the two groups approach the issue of security. The right believes in a sharp line of demarcation. There is no conflict and no compromise. One either owns what one creates, or one does not. The line between right and left is moral, ethical, economic, religious, political, and logical. On one side are those who live by the inalienability of ownership, human rights and security and those who think might makes right and the end justifies the means. For this latter group who owns what is always a debate and a question resolved ultimately by force.
Security is not achieved through a process of cookie cutter duplication. Security does not require we erase individuality. To attempt to create security by promoting a monastic submission to a social agenda is to misunderstand the meaning of security.
Security is not an abstract idea. Security must always point to a subject that is secure. Our sense of self, our individually is expressed in our possessions. No one has the right to exploit the efforts and activity of others. To alienate a person from their ownership rights requires a power disparity. Security is not compatible with one person having authority over another. This is tyranny and tyranny does not generate security. If one person infringes upon the property rights of another equality and equal rights is a mirage. Security does not exist in an environment divided by power disparities.
The free market is said to be a market without regulations, but we see no markets that fulfill these conditions. A better term is a secure market because free markets suggest anything with a price can and ought to be sold. Markets must be secured to be free; they do not spring spontaneously from conditions of tyranny. All costs must be paid for by the individual that produced the cost. If we cannot assign costs to individuals, we do not have a secure market. If our market is not secure there is no security.
Authors have a right to what they create and no right to what was not created by the agent that claims ownership, unless the possession was acquired through the agency of a secure market. No costs can be hidden or externalized. All value must be accounted for in the price.
All costs and all equity must be accounted for, i.e. affixed to the account of the author. Security is attached to a secure market. Only in a secure market can security be achieved. No costs can be permitted not paid for by the originator and no benefit can be enjoyed not paid for through the mechanisms of a secure market.
Capitalism has resulted in concentrations of wealth never before seen and democracy has systematically removed from the very people it is supposed to empower, the ability to resist the systematic theft that permits this concentration of power to exist. This is not a call to implement socialism or communism, its a discussion on the evils of capitalism and democracy and a suggestion that it is time to learn about and build the merit-driven mission Jesus told us to be