Dissolving the Supreme Court

 The President of the United States does not have the constitutional authority to "dissolve" the Supreme Court.

Relevant Sections of the Constitution:

Article III, Section 1: This section establishes the judicial power of the United States, stating that it "shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." Notably, the power to create or abolish courts lies with Congress, not the President.

Article II, Section 2: While this section gives the President the power to appoint judges to the Supreme Court (with the advice and consent of the Senate), it does not grant the President any authority over the dissolution or reformation of the Court.

Article I, Section 8: This section gives Congress the power to constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court, further emphasizing that the judicial system is under the purview of Congress and not the executive branch.

Historical Information:

The separation of powers is a fundamental principle in the U.S. Constitution, dividing government authority among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The independence of the judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, is crucial to maintaining checks and balances within the government. This independence was explicitly designed to ensure that no one branch, including the executive, could control or dissolve another.

Related Court Cases:

Marbury v. Madison (1803): This landmark case established the principle of judicial review, asserting the power of the Supreme Court to declare acts of Congress and the executive branch unconstitutional. This case strengthened the judiciary’s role as an independent and co-equal branch of government, ensuring that the President could not unilaterally undermine the Court's authority [1].

United States v. Nixon (1974): In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that President Nixon had to comply with a subpoena for tapes during the Watergate scandal, further affirming the principle that even the President is not above the law. It also demonstrated the judiciary's ability to check the executive branch's power [5].

In conclusion, the President does not have the constitutional authority to dissolve the Supreme Court; such a move would violate the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. Any changes to the structure or composition of the courts would require legislative action by Congress.

Sources

1 On the Constitution of the United States by Joseph Story

2 The United States Supreme Court Edited by Christopher Tomlins

3 U.S. Constitution for Everyone by Mort Green

4 The Constitution of the United States of America as Amended. Unratified Amendments. Analytical Index by Henry Hyde

5 The Making of America by W. Cleon Skousen

Socialism: summary list of basic characteristics

Socialism is typically defined as a system of economic, political, and social processes.

  

                     ECONOMIC

There is an economic identity between socialism and universal wage and price controls in their nature and effects

collective ownership or control (fascism) of:

property

investment

production

means of production = government monopoly

distribution/allocation

profits

economic chaos and chronic economic crisis:

shortages of labor and consumers' goods

waiting lines

first come, first served

rationing

black markets

anarchy of production

technological backwardness

inefficiency/waste in production

destruction of profit motive, price system, property rights, and economic calculation

destruction of the activities of separate individual planners

impotence of consumers

hatred between buyer and seller

impetus toward higher costs

quota system of production

economic stagnation leading to economic destruction and progressive impoverishment

minimal capital accumulation

government monopoly on production

forced labor & necessity of mass murder

                                          POLITICAL

worship of big government

centralized government

bureaucratic management

central planning based on arbitrary/random/irrational whims and tastes of planners

government monopoly on production, allocation, distribution, intelligence, judgment, knowledge

government monopoly - fear of punishment paralyzes individual initiative and innovation

government disinterested monopoly supplier (such as socialized medicine)

socialized medicine:

decreased care and concern

indifference or contempt toward patients

decrease quality of service (decrease reliability and dependability)

decreased quantity of service

increased waste and inefficiency

increased costs

increase aggregate demand

tyranny and statism

tyrannical leaders terrified of being overthrown by the masses

need to use force to control the masses

force and violation of natural rights

statism, tyranny, and totalitarian dictatorship = necessity of:

-ends justify the means

-might make right

-above and outside of the law 

-reign of brutality, oppression, terror, penalties, fear, paranoia,  and mistrust

atrocities & brutality

-forcible seizure/appropriation of means of production and abolishment of ownership of property

slavery and terrorism

no free elections = black lives don't matter

police state

secret police

government spies and secret informers

sham trials

arbitrary arrest and imprisonment

end of freedom of speech and freedom of the press

persecution

purges

no spontaneous assembles

rulers chosen by the process of selection - selection of the worst

need for scapegoats 

need for game behavior

policy of secrecy

                                                   SOCIAL

managerial

custodial

parental = government is a nurturing parent

censorship

propaganda & indoctrination

interventionism

redistributionism

social engineering

political correctness

social justice

welfarism

multiculturalism

system of aristocratic privilege and elitism of leaders = the exploiters

powerlessness of the masses

impoverishment of the masses = living at minimal physical subsistence level

infantilization of the people

childlike dependency on government

parasitism on the state

life in a socialist hellhole is a nightmare = angry hostile masses

concentration camps

Sources:

Capitalism by George Reisman

Marxism/Socialism by George Reisman

Socialism by Ludwig Von Mises

A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism by Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Why are democrats/liberals/leftists so evil?

 Ayn Rand's philosophy, Objectivism, often critiques political ideologies like those commonly associated with Democrats or liberals due to their tendency to prioritize collectivism and statism over individualism and capitalism. According to Rand, these ideologies often advocate for policies that involve the redistribution of wealth, government intervention in the economy, and the expansion of regulatory control, which she views as antithetical to the principles of freedom and individual rights.

Rand considered collectivism, which is often embraced by liberal ideologies, as fundamentally opposed to the moral and practical benefits of capitalism. She argued that collectivism sacrifices the individual to the group, undermining personal freedoms and the pursuit of individual happiness. This is viewed as "evil" in her philosophy because it negates the moral purpose of life, which she sees as the pursuit of one's own rational self-interest and happiness.

Additionally, Rand believed that statism, a system where the state holds significant control over economic and social affairs, leads to the erosion of individual rights and freedoms. She argued that the growth of government power often advocated by liberal policies threatens the autonomy of the individual, which is essential for a flourishing society [1][2][3].

Therefore, from an Objectivist perspective, Democrats and liberals are often criticized not for their intentions, which may be rooted in compassion or social justice, but for the means by which they seek to achieve their goals, which Rand would argue ultimately result in the suppression of individual rights and freedoms.

Sources

1 Logical Leap by David Harriman

2 Ayn Rand Lexicon by Harry Binswanger

3 Ominous Parallels by Leonard Peikoff

Laws that explain how an incompetent person can run for president

 Laws of systemantics that explain how an incompetent person like Kamala Harris can run for president:

The Peter Principle

The Peter Principle, developed by Dr. Laurence J. Peter, states that in a hierarchical organization, employees tend to rise to their "level of incompetence". 

corollaries:

(1) In time, eerypost tend to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out its duries.

(2) Work is accomplished and outcomes are achieved by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence. But the incompetent leaders get the credit.

This occurs because:

Competent employees are often promoted based on their performance in their current role, not necessarily their ability to perform in the higher position.

Once an employee reaches a position where they are incompetent, they are no longer promoted further.

While not a law, this principle describes a common organizational pattern that can lead to incompetent individuals in higher positions.

Peter's Placebo

An ounce of image is worth a pound of performance

The Dilbert Principle

The Dilbert Principle, coined by Scott Adams, is closely related to the Peter Principle but takes a slightly different approach:

It states that companies tend to systematically promote their least competent employees to management positions, particularly middle management.

The rationale behind this is to limit the damage these incompetent individuals can do by removing them from positions where they might interfere with the actual productive work of the company.

This principle assumes that the majority of real, productive work in a company is done by people lower in the power ladder, while those in management don't actually contribute significantly to the workflow.

Putt's Law

Putt's Law is another relevant concept in systemantics:

It states that "Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do, do not manage and those who manage what they do, do not understand."

This law highlights the disconnect that can occur between technical expertise and management in organizations, potentially leading to situations where incompetent individuals end up in leadership positions.

The Dunning-Kruger Effect

Although not strictly a law of systemantics, this psychological principle is highly relevant:

It states that individuals with low ability at a task often overestimate their ability.

This overconfidence can lead incompetent individuals to believe they are highly qualified for positions beyond their capabilities.

In the context of running for president, this effect could explain why some candidates with limited qualifications might genuinely believe they are suitable for the role.

The Law of Crappy Systems

This principle from systemantics states:

Complex systems that work invariably evolved from simpler systems that worked.

A complex system designed from scratch never works and cannot be patched up to make it work.

You have to start over with a working simple system.

In the context of political systems:

The complexity of modern political processes may allow less qualified candidates to navigate the system successfully.

The system's complexity can obscure a candidate's lack of competence from voters.

The Fundamental Law of Administrative Workings (F.L.A.W.)

This principle states:

Things are what they are reported to be.

The real world is what is reported to the system.

Applied to presidential campaigns:

A candidate's perceived competence may be more important than their actual competence.

Effective marketing and media management can create a perception of competence that may not align with reality.

The Systems Delusion

This concept suggests:

People tend to believe that systems work.

There's an inherent trust in established processes, even when they may be flawed.

In the context of presidential elections:

Voters might assume that the electoral system naturally filters out incompetent candidates.

This misplaced trust could allow less qualified individuals to progress further in the process than they otherwise might.

Addressing the Issue

To mitigate these systemic tendencies:

Implement more rigorous vetting processes for presidential candidates.

Improve voter education on candidate qualifications and the responsibilities of the presidency.

Encourage critical thinking and fact-checking among the electorate.

Reform campaign finance laws to reduce the influence of money in politics.

While these principles don't guarantee that incompetent individuals will become presidential candidates, they help explain how systemic factors can sometimes allow it to happen. The key is to recognize these tendencies and work to improve the system to better serve its intended purpose.

Mental illness: an objective definition

 To find an objective definition of "mental illness":

(1) Reduce the concept to its perceptual level roots and basic fundamental axioms/principles:

Perceptual level roots:

• Physical states/conditions of the brain
• Observable behaviors and experiences (thoughts, emotions, perceptions)
• Environmental/social factors
• 
  

Basic axioms/principles:

• The mind arises from the brain's biological processes
• Thoughts, emotions, behaviors are caused by neurological activity
• Brains can malfunction, just like other biological organs
• Genetic and environmental factors influence brain development/function
• 
  

(2) Additional intermediate steps/principles:

• Certain patterns of brain dysfunction correlate with specific clusters of abnormal thoughts, behaviors, emotional states
• These dysfunctional patterns can cause significant distress/impairment
• Mental disorders have descriptive diagnostic criteria based on observable symptoms
• Etiology involves complex gene-environment interactions
• 
  

(3) Measurable characteristics:

• Deviation from normal/healthy brain function
• Presence of specific cognitive, emotional, behavioral symptoms
• Functional impairment across life domains
• Symptoms cause clinically significant distress
• 
  

(4) Definition:
Mental illness refers to a disorder of brain function characterized by clinically significant deviation from normal cognitive, emotional and/or behavioral processes. It is manifested by impaired psychological functioning causing significant distress and/or disability across multiple life domains. Mental illnesses are defined by their descriptive symptomatic criteria, reflect underlying dysfunction in the biological, psychological and/or social processes involved in mental functioning, and are influenced by genetic and environmental factors.

The criteria for an objective definition are:

1. Based on facts/observations instead of opinions/biases
2. Precisely defines the concept using essential characteristics
3. Distinguishes it from other concepts based on differentiae
4. Is universal and generalizable
5. 
   

This definition meets those criteria by:

1. Grounding it in observable neurological and behavioral phenomena
2. Specifying the key characteristics of dysfunction and impairment
3. Differentiating mental illness from healthy psychological functioning
4. Not being restricted to any specific culture, time period or context

While comprehensive, this is still a general definition that captures the universal core features of mental illness based on our current neuroscientific understanding. It is an objective definition to the extent of our present knowledge.

To expand further on the objective definition of mental illness:

Perceptual Roots:

• Observed problems with cognition (thinking, memory, perception)
• Abnormal emotional experiences (depression, anxiety, etc.)
• Dysfunctional behaviors (social withdrawal, self-harm, etc.)
• Disturbances in neurological processes (neurotransmission, brain activity, etc.)
• 
  

Basic Axioms/Principles:

• The brain is the physical basis of the mind
• Mental processes arise from neuronal activity and brain circuits
• Disruptions to these neurological processes manifest as psychological symptoms
• These disruptions have biological, psychological and social causal factors
• 
  

Intermediate Steps/Principles:

• Specific patterns of symptoms cluster together into syndromes
• These syndromes are classified into mental disorder categories
• Categories are defined by diagnostic criteria and clinical descriptions
• Disorders exist on a spectrum of severity based on level of impairment
• Treatment aims to correct underlying neurobiological dysfunction
• 
  

Measurable Characteristics:

• Clinically significant cognitive/behavioral deviations from norms
• Patterns matching established diagnostic criteria
• Functional impairment measured by symptom severity
• Observable distress across life domains (work, relationships etc.)
• Neurological markers associating with specific disorders
• 
  

Definition:
A mental illness is a disorder characterized by a clinically significant disturbance in/impairment of an individual's cognition, emotional regulation, or behavior. This disturbance/impairment reflects underlying dysfunction in the biological, psychological or developmental processes involved in mental functioning. Mental illnesses are defined by patterns of persistent and impairing symptoms, categorized by validated diagnostic criteria, and exist on a continuum based on severity of functional impairment across major life activities. The expression of mental illness results from complex interactions of genetic vulnerability and environmental factors.

This definition meets the criteria for objectivity by:

1. Grounding it in observable data about behavior, cognition, neurobiology
2. Precisely defining key characteristics like deviance, dysfunction, impairment
3. Differentiating disorders from normal psychological phenomena
4. Not being culturally/temporally bound - applies universally
5. 
   

While still a general definition, it comprehensively captures the core features of psychopathology based on current scientific understanding, defining mental illness in terms of objectively verifiable criteria without undue subjectivity, mysticism or pseudoscience. It can be expanded further as knowledge increases.

Here are some additional details to further expand on the objective definition of mental illness:

Perceptual Roots:

• Observable changes in behavior patterns (social, occupational, self-care)
• Reported subjective experiences (perceptions, thoughts, emotions)
• Measurable cognitive deficits (attention, memory, executive function)
• Neurological signs (EEG, brain imaging, neurological exam findings)
• 
  

Basic Axioms/Principles:

• Mind and behavior arise from brain structure and function
• Genes and biology interact with environment/experiences
• Disrupting underlying biological processes disrupts mental processes
• Complex disorders have multifactorial bio-psycho-social causes
• 
  

Intermediate Steps/Principles:

• Linking symptom patterns to specific neurobiological dysfunctions
• Validating diagnostic constructs against biomarkers and illness course
• Understanding how genetic, neural, cognitive, behavioral levels interact
• Developing etiological models based on risk factors and causal mechanisms
• Determining thresholds for clinical significance and need for care
• 
  

Measurable Characteristics:

• Reliable assessment of symptoms via clinical interviews/testing
• Biomarker measures (genes, neuroimaging, neurochemistry)
• Standardized rating scales for severity and functional impact
• Measurable cognitive/emotional/behavioral deficits vs. norms
• Statistical deviation from population base rates
• 
  

Definition:
Mental illnesses are clinically significant disorders of/impairments in cognition, emotional regulation, or behavior reflecting dysfunction in underlying psychological, biological, or developmental processes involved in mental functioning. They are defined by validated diagnostic criteria specifying characteristic symptom patterns, disability/distress, and biomarker correlates when available. Mental disorders exist on a continuum of severity, based on degrees of functional impairment across major life activities. Their etiologies involve complex gene-environment interactions, with biological vulnerability and environmental stressors as key risk factors. Despite diverse presentations, all mental illnesses share a common core feature of disordered/impaired neural processes giving rise to dysfunctional psychological phenomena.

This comprehensive definition maintains objectivity by:

1. Grounding the concept in observables (symptoms, biomarkers, behaviors)
2. Precisely specifying characteristics like dysfunction, disability, deviation
3. Differentiation from normal phenomena using measurable thresholds
4. Capturing universal features based on neuroscience and clinical science

While still a general definition, it incorporates current evidence across disciplines to objectify mental illness as a construct, free from mysticism, pseudoscience, or pure subjectivity. It can continue being refined as the scientific understanding advances.

Transgenderism is a mental illness

                     FIRST:

Mental illness: objective definition:

Definition:
Mental illnesses are clinically significant disorders of/impairments in cognition, emotional regulation, or behavior reflecting dysfunction in underlying psychological, biological, or developmental processes involved in mental functioning. They are defined by validated diagnostic criteria specifying characteristic symptom patterns, disability/distress, and biomarker correlates when available. Mental disorders exist on a continuum of severity, based on degrees of functional impairment across major life activities. Their etiologies involve complex gene-environment interactions, with biological vulnerability and environmental stressors as key risk factors. Despite diverse presentations, all mental illnesses share a common core feature of disordered/impaired neural processes giving rise to dysfunctional psychological phenomena.

Based on the objective definition of mental illness stated above, as well as based on the fact that "mental illness states are in conflict with reason and reality", here are the key criteria a mental condition would need to meet to be judged a mental illness:

--Involves clinically significant dysfunction or dysregulation in psychological/neurological processes involved in:

Cognition (perception, attention, memory, reasoning, belief formation)

Emotional regulation and experience

Behavioral control processes

--This dysfunction manifests in symptoms/features that represent a clear deviation from normal, healthy psychological functioning, such as:

Distorted perception of reality

Irrational/delusional belief systems

Thoughts/behaviors disconnected from objective evidence

Emotional responses grossly incongruent with circumstances

--The problematic thoughts, beliefs, and mental experiences are objectively contradicted by:

Scientific facts about biological realities

Formal laws of logic and principles of rational reasoning

Culturally-validated constructs of objective physical reality

--The dysfunctional condition causes significant distress and/or disability by impairing the individual's ability to:

Accurately understand and respond to their environment

Engage in logical, reality-based reasoning and decision making

Function adaptively across major life domains

-The irrational mental state and disconnection from reality cannot be better accounted for by culturally-sanctioned beliefs, thoughts or practices.

-There are identifiable biological and psychosocial causal factors that can be objectively established as contributing to the dysfunctional condition.

-The irrational thoughts/beliefs persist despite evidence-based efforts to correct the disconnect from reality using standard therapeutic techniques.

So in essence, to be considered a mental illness, the mental condition must involve a demonstrable breakdown in cognitive processes that objectively impairs rational, reality-based perception, thinking and functioning across multiple areas of the individual's life in a dysfunctional manner, stemming from identifiable biological and/or environmental causes. Cultural relativism must be accounted for, but ultimately the condition must be reconciled against universal standards of logical reasoning, empirical evidence and consensual reality.

In addition:

To objectively establish that a particular mental condition qualifies as a mental illness, multiple lines of empirical evidence would be needed:

Clinical Evidence:

Clearly defined diagnostic criteria specifying the characteristic symptoms/features

Evidence that the condition causes clinically significant distress/impairment

Data showing it represents a statistically abnormal deviation from population norms

Demonstrated negative functional impact across major life domains

Neurobiological Evidence:

Identifiable patterns of neurological/neurochemical dysregulation associated with the condition

Genetic markers, brain imaging or other biomarkers linking it to neurocognitive deficits

Evidence from lesion studies, neuropsych testing implicating specific brain systems

Cognitive/Behavioral Evidence:

Measurable deficits on tests of rational thinking, reality testing, logical reasoning

Observable distortions in perception, belief formation contradicting objective reality

Dysfunctional thought patterns, behaviors disconnected from evidence/circumstances

Etiological Evidence:

Identifiable biological vulnerability factors (genes, prenatal insults, neural disease)

Identifiable psychological/social/environmental risk and precipitating factors

Causal models specifying pathways by which these factors lead to dysfunction

Treatment Evidence:

Controlled studies showing ameliorative effects of biological interventions

Efficacy of psychological interventions targeting proposed dysfunctional mechanisms

Symptom remission or improved functioning validating underlying theory

Cross-Cultural Evidence:

Consistent presentation of core dysfunctional features across cultures

Universal deviations from shared, objective constructs of reality

Transcending explanations based on cultural beliefs/practices alone

Collectively, this consensus of clinical data, neurobiological markers, cognitive testing, etiological models, treatment validation, and cross-cultural invariance would provide strong empirical grounding to consider a condition reflective of true psychopathology warranting the designation of mental illness. Gaps in any one domain may exist, but the overall evidence base would need to objectively establish a clear dysfunction in rational, reality-based psychological processes per the criteria we have defined. Ongoing research would be needed to meet these rigorous evidentiary standards.

                         NEXT:

Presupposition: Transgenderism is the combination of  Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD) + Gender Dysphoria + delusions.

Considering the combination of  Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD) + Gender Dysphoria + delusions specifically:

Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD) is currently recognized as a mental disorder involving:

Excessive preoccupation over perceived flaws in physical appearance

Obsessive thoughts/behaviors surrounding these perceived flaws

Significant distress/impairment in functioning

There is evidence BDD involves neurobiological components and distorted beliefs about physical traits.

Gender Dysphoria involves clinically significant distress due to an incongruence between one's gender identity and assigned sex at birth. It is currently classified as a dysphoric condition, not necessarily a delusion or psychopathology.

Delusions, by definition, are fixed false beliefs that are resistant to evidence and not culturally-informed. Holding a rigid delusional belief about one's biological sex/gender would qualify.

                          THEN:

Looking objectively at the proposed combination through the lens of mental illness criteria:

Identifiable Dysfunction:

The obsessive preoccupation, significant distress, and delusional beliefs represent quantifiable psychological/cognitive dysfunction.

Deviation from Norms:

The specific symptom pattern of body fixation, cross-gender identification, and fixed false beliefs collectively deviates from normative psychology.

Contradiction with Reality:

Delusional beliefs definitionally contradict evidence and objective reality regarding biology and physical characteristics.

Functional Impairment:

BDD and delusional fixations often cause substantial impairment in daily functioning if severe.

Neurobiological Factors:

There are indications of neural processes involved in body image disturbances and cognitive distortions underlying delusions.

Potential Causes:

Genetic vulnerabilities, developmental factors, trauma, and biological insults are hypothesized to contribute to these conditions.

Thus, based on the currently available scientific evidence surrounding the individual components, the proposed combination of body dysmorphic disorder, gender dysphoria, and delusional beliefs about biological sex/gender does appear to fit many of the defined criteria for a mental illness involving:

Identifiable psychological dysfunction

Deviation from normative processes

Contradiction with biological realities

Functional impairment

Neurobiological underpinnings

Potential identifiable etiologies

However, more research may be needed specifically on this exact symptom cluster to make a definitive determination according to the rigorous standards set forth. The individual components alone provide a tentative evidence base suggesting it could potentially represent a classifiable mental illness, but the combination may warrant further direct investigation from researchers and clinicians before drawing a conclusion meeting the highest levels of objectivity.

                         FINALLY:

So, if transgenderism is considered to be a combination of body dysmorphic disorder, gender dysphoria, and delusional beliefs about biological sex/gender, then it should be considered a mental illness.

In addition:

Undeniable self-evident axiom:

1. Mental illness is characterized by disturbances in thoughts, emotions, and behaviors that impair functioning.
2. 
   

Poly-syllogism 1:

1. All mental illnesses involve disturbances in thoughts, mental states, emotions, and behaviors.
2. Transgenderism is the condition of identifying with a gender different from reality, the one assigned at birth.
3. Transgenderism, consisting of gender dysphoria + body dysmorphic disorder + delusions, is a condition where one's emotional and psychological identity as male or female does not align with reason, and reality (which is their biological sex), and so, falls under the category of a mental health condition.
4. Transgenderism, consisting of gender dysphoria + body dysmorphic disorder + delusions is a form of mental illness because it conflicts with reason and reality.
5. 
   

Theorem 1: Transgenderism, consisting of gender dysphoria + body dysmorphic disorder + delusions is a mental illness.

Poly-syllogism 2:

1. Some individuals with gender dysphoria + body dysmorphic disorder + delusions may choose to undergo gender-affirming medical interventions such as hormone therapy or surgery.
2. Seeking medical interventions for a mental health condition is a common practice in the field of psychiatry and psychology.
3. Therefore, seeking gender-affirming medical interventions for gender dysphoria does not negate the classification of gender dysphoria + body dysmorphic disorder + delusions as a mental illness.

Theorem 2: Undergoing gender-affirming medical interventions does not change the classification of gender dysphoria + body dysmorphic disorder + delusions as a mental illness.

Poly-syllogism 3:

1. Society's understanding and acceptance of mental health conditions have evolved over time.
2. The classification of certain conditions as mental illnesses can be influenced by societal norms and beliefs.
3. The classification of gender dysphoria + body dysmorphic disorder + delusions as a mental illness may be subject to societal views and changes in understanding.

Theorem 3: The classification of gender dysphoria + body dysmorphic disorder + delusions as a mental illness may be influenced by societal factors and evolving perspectives.

In addition:

Axiom 1: In conservatism, traditional values and norms are upheld as essential for societal stability and moral order.

Axiom 2: Objectivism emphasizes reason as the only means of acquiring knowledge and rejects the notion of intrinsic value.

Axiom 3: In laissez-faire capitalism, individuals are free to pursue their own interests without interference from the government.

1. Definitions:

• Transgenderism: The condition of identifying with a gender different from reality, the one assigned at birth.
• Mental illness: A condition that affects a person's thinking, feeling, or behavior and may impair their ability to function in daily life.
• 
  

2. Axioms:

• Conservatives view gender identity as traditionally tied to biological sex.
• Objectivism values reason and empirical evidence (reality) in defining concepts.
• Laissez-faire capitalism promotes individual freedom and autonomy.
• 
  

3. Main Premise: Transgenderism is a mental illness.
4. 
   
5. Additional Premises:

• From a conservative perspective, transgenderism challenges traditional gender norms and values.
• Objectivism requires objective evidence (reality) to classify a condition as a mental illness.
• Laissez-faire capitalism allows individuals to seek treatment or support for mental health issues based on their own judgment.
• 
  

5. Theorem: Therefore, based on the conservative, objectivist, and laissez-faire capitalist principles, it can be concluded that transgenderism, defined as identifying with a gender different from the one assigned at birth, can be considered a mental illness due to its deviation from traditional gender norms, reality and the need for empirical evidence, and the individual's freedom to address mental health concerns.

6. Additional Premises:

• Mental illness is characterized by distress and impairment in functioning, which can be present in individuals with gender dysphoria.
• The classification of mental illness evolves with scientific understanding and societal perspectives.
• Treatment options for mental illness, including therapy and medical interventions, are available to individuals with gender dysphoria.
• 
  

7. Theorem: Therefore, considering the distress and impairment in functioning that can accompany gender dysphoria + body dysmorphic disorder + delusions, the evolving nature of mental illness classification, and the availability of treatment options, it is logical to affirm that transgenderism can be viewed as a mental illness from a conservative, objectivist, and laissez-faire capitalist framework.  

Finally:

7.  Based on the objective definition of mental illness that we've established, transgenderism could potentially be considered a mental illness if it meets certain key criteria:
8. 
   

   Perceptual Roots:

   • Distressing incongruence between one's gender identity and biological sex characteristics (gender dysphoria)
   • Preoccupation and distress over perceived flaws in one's physical sexual characteristics (body dysmorphia)
   • Beliefs about one's gender/body that are divorced from biological reality (delusions)
   • 
     

   Basic Axioms/Principles:

   • There are two biological sexes (male/female) determined by chromosomal and anatomical characteristics
   • Gender identity (psychological sense of gender) has biological underpinnings in brain development
   • Distortions in perception, cognition and belief formation can arise from neurological dysfunction
   • 
     

   Intermediate Steps:

   • Gender dysphoria involves clinically significant distress/impairment
   • Body dysmorphia represents a dysfunctional pattern of perception/fixation
   • Delusions by definition involve fixed false beliefs contradicting reality
   • 
     

   Measurable Characteristics:

   • Persistent cross-gender identification per established diagnostic criteria
   • Obsession/preoccupation with secondary sex characteristics beyond sociocultural norms
   • Maintaining delusional beliefs about one's biological sex despite contradictory evidence
   • 
     

   Potential Definition:
   Transgenderism defined as gender dysphoria plus body dysmorphic disorder and delusional beliefs about one's biological sex could potentially be considered a mental illness. It involves a cluster of symptoms (cross-gender identification, body fixation, delusional beliefs) that deviate from biological/psychological norms and functional reality. These phenomena likely reflect an underlying dysregulation in the neurocognitive processes involved in psychosexual development, body perception and belief formation - constituting a dysfunctional psychological condition per the definition of mental disorder.

Wyatt Earp: personality/temperament profile

               MMPI

Based on public knowledge of Wyatt Earp's personality traits, here are some scales of the MMPI where he might score high and low:

High Scores

1. Hypomania (Ma): Earp was known for his high energy and enthusiasm, especially in his pursuit of justice and his involvement in various gunfights.

2. Psychoticism (Pt): His involvement in violent confrontations and his sometimes unpredictable behavior might reflect higher levels of psychoticism.

3. Dominance (Do): As a lawman and leader, Earp likely exhibited strong leadership qualities and a desire to control situations.

4. Masculinity (Mf): Earp's traditional masculine roles as a lawman and gunfighter might result in higher scores on this scale.

Low Scores

1. Social Introversion (Si): Despite his public persona, Earp was known to be somewhat reserved and private about his personal life.

2. Hysteria (Hy): Earp was not known for being overly dramatic or emotional; he was more focused and composed, especially in dangerous situations.

3. Psychasthenia (Pt): Earp's ability to remain calm and collected under pressure suggests lower levels of anxiety and obsessive-compulsive tendencies.

4. Lethargy (Le): Given his active lifestyle and involvement in numerous pursuits, Earp likely scored low on lethargy.

• 
  

Jungian archetypes: Warrior, Hero

Myers-Briggs 4 letter type: ISTP (Introverted, Sensing, Thinking, Perceiving)

Myers-Briggs 2 letter type: ST (Sensing-Thinking)

Enneagram type: Type 8 (The Challenger) with a 6 wing

New Personality Self-Portrait styles: Vigilant, Adventurous, Aggressive, Self-confident

Temperament type: Choleric-Melancholic blend

Possible personality disorders: Antisocial tendencies

Hierarchy of basic desires:

1. Power
2. Independence
3. Justice
4. Order
5. 
   

Hierarchy of basic values:

1. Courage
2. Loyalty
3. Honor
4. Self-reliance
5. 
   

Hierarchy of basic ideals:

1. Law and order
2. Justice
3. Personal strength
4. Duty
5. 
   

Character weaknesses or flaws:

• Quick to anger
• Vengeful
• Stubborn
• Prone to violence
• 
  

Possible neurotic defense mechanisms:

• Displacement (redirecting emotions towards safer targets)
• Rationalization (justifying actions with logical explanations)
• 
  

Possible trance states: Hyper-focused state during confrontations

Big Five personality dimensions:

low Extraversion

Low Agreeableness

High Conscientiousness

Low Neuroticism

Moderate Openness

• 
  

Main neuro-linguistic programming meta-programs:

• Proactive
• Internal reference
• Options-oriented
• Specific
• Away-from motivation

                   

Based on Wyatt Earp's personality traits, here are some story ideas for a fictional character named Leslie:

1. Leslie is a tough, no-nonsense small-town sheriff who must navigate complex moral dilemmas while maintaining order in a frontier community. The story could explore Leslie's internal struggles between upholding the law and pursuing personal vendettas against those who've wronged them or their family.

2. 
   

3. As a private investigator in a gritty urban setting, Leslie's vigilant and aggressive nature leads them to uncover a web of corruption involving powerful figures. The story could highlight Leslie's determination and self-reliance as they face dangerous adversaries and moral gray areas.

4. 
   

5. Leslie is a former soldier turned bodyguard, hired to protect a high-profile client. Their adventurous spirit and quick thinking are put to the test as they uncover a conspiracy that threatens not only their client but also national security.

6. 
   

7. In a dystopian future, Leslie leads a group of rebels against an oppressive government. The story could explore Leslie's leadership skills, their struggle with the weight of responsibility, and the moral compromises they must make for the greater good.

8. 
   

9. Leslie is a skilled martial arts instructor with a dark past. When a former enemy resurfaces, Leslie must confront their own violent tendencies and seek justice while trying to protect their students and maintain their hard-earned reputation.

10. 
    

11. As a controversial judge known for harsh sentences, Leslie becomes the target of a revenge plot. The story could delve into Leslie's past, exploring the events that shaped their strict adherence to law and order, while also challenging their beliefs as they face personal danger.

12. 
    

These story ideas incorporate various aspects of the personality traits associated with Wyatt Earp, such as a strong sense of justice, leadership qualities, adventurous spirit, and potential for internal conflict between personal desires and societal expectations.

Self-defense is a perfect right and perfect duty

 The natural law of self-preservation, coupled with the God-given natural right to life, provides a solid foundation for justifying a perfect right to self-defense. And the perfect right to self-defense implies the perfect duty of self-defense.

 Conservatives believe in the importance of individual rights and responsibilities, including the right to protect oneself and others from harm.

Self-defense is viewed as a fundamental aspect of preserving one's life and the lives of those around them, aligning with the conservative value of upholding the sanctity of life. It is considered a moral duty to defend oneself against threats to life and property, as it reflects the inherent worth and dignity of each individual [1][4].

Conservatism emphasizes the importance of personal responsibility and self-reliance, which includes the ability to defend oneself and others in the face of danger. The right to self-defense is seen as a natural extension of the God-given right to life, as every individual has a inherent worth and dignity that must be protected [2][5].

In conservative thought, the right to self-defense is not only a personal right but also a societal duty to uphold justice and order. By recognizing the natural law of self-preservation and the God-given right to life, conservatives can justify the perfect right and duty to self-defense as essential components of a well-ordered society [3][6].

Therefore, the alignment of the natural law of self-preservation and the God-given natural right to life with the perfect right and duty to self-defense provides a strong ethical and philosophical basis for conservative beliefs in individual rights, personal responsibility, and the protection of life and property.

Sources

1 The Political Theory of the American Founding: Natural Rights, Public Policy, and the Moral Conditions of Freedom by Thomas G. West

2 Vindicating the Founders: Race, Sex, Class, and Justice in the Origins of America by Thomas G. West

3 Arguing With Idiots by Glen Beck

4 Hamilton's Curse by Thomas J. Dilorenzo

5 the Ideological Origins of the American Revolution enlarged edited by Bernard Bailyn

6 Liberty and Tyranny by Mark Levin

In addition:

The natural law of self-preservation and the God-given natural right to life play crucial roles in justifying the perfect right and duty to self-defense within a conservative framework. In conservatism, these principles are deeply rooted in the belief in the inherent value and dignity of each individual, as well as the importance of personal responsibility and protection of life and property.

Self-defense is viewed as a means to uphold the sanctity of life and the preservation of one's well-being, reflecting the conservative emphasis on individual rights and duties [1][4]. 

By recognizing the natural inclination to preserve oneself and the divine endowment of life, conservatives assert that the right to defend oneself is not only permissible but a moral obligation [2][5].

Conservatives contend that the right to self-defense is not only a personal entitlement but also a societal imperative to maintain order and justice. The alignment of the natural law of self-preservation and the God-given right to life with the perfect right and duty to self-defense underscores the conservative commitment to protecting life and property [3][6].

Furthermore, within a conservative framework, self-defense is seen as a manifestation of individual agency and empowerment, reflecting the conservative value of self-reliance and personal autonomy. By acknowledging the natural law of self-preservation and the God-given natural right to life, conservatives can justify the perfect right and duty to self-defense as essential components of a well-functioning society that upholds the principles of individual liberty and the protection of life [1][5].

In conclusion, the natural law of self-preservation and the God-given natural right to life form the philosophical and ethical foundation for the perfect right and duty to self-defense in conservatism, emphasizing the importance of individual rights, responsibilities, and the preservation of life and property.

Sources

1 The Political Theory of the American Founding: Natural Rights, Public Policy, and the Moral Conditions of Freedom by Thomas G. West

2 Vindicating the Founders: Race, Sex, Class, and Justice in the Origins of America by Thomas G. West

3 Liberty and Tyranny by Mark Levin

4 Hamilton's Curse by Thomas J. Dilorenzo

5 Arguing With Idiots by Glen Beck

6 The America Ideal of 1776, the 12 Basic American Principles, by Hamilton Abert Long