Q: “Curt: Let us assume that science gets rid of these pseudoscientific intellec

Q: “Curt: Let us assume that science gets rid of these pseudoscientific intellectuals. What would be so beneficial?”

Great question.

Our evidence so far, and admittedly it’s not a large population, is that just as physical science has converted man from many particular rules to a few general rules and the result has been about a standard deviation in performance despite the same brains – though not as much as greek reason, not as much as language but still a leap – my (our) work has produced about the same increase in measurable performance, because there is literally nothing we cannot understand and explain at least at human scale. This is because there is a very simple, painfully simple logic to the universe at all scales.

So to address the ‘why’? At the very least, there is a serious problem of the relationship between cognitive performance and economic and political condition, and therefore qualit of life, and the slope is not linear – it’s terrifying.

So while before the industrial revolution it appears that europeans had 105iq’s and the brits even higher, in America, because of immigration, urbanization, and asymmetric reproduction we have dropped below an average 100IQ points, and there is a cliff at about 97, which we should hit any year now. This is causing economic bifurcation which is causing political bifurcation, and the numbers are devastating.

So a shift by a standard deviation, through a revolution in education (which we all know we are due for) would compensate for the loss of IQ, and the economic and political consequences of the present bifurcation. Even we were to politically separate into feminine-irresponsible-left and masculine-responsibile-right states (which I expect will occur this century) it will still produce benefits for everyone.

It’s one thing to lose strategic advantage, an other to lose economic advantage, another to lose technological advantage, an other to lose scientific advantage, but the worst are to lose cultural (formal and informal institutions) advantage, or genetic advantage, because you can fix everything else but those two.

So yes, nearly every field will require and benefit from some reformation, and yes I’ve done the primary work on most fields (by 2017 really).

We lost a thousand years in europe last time to the abrahamic destruction of human thought – and we still haven’t fully recovered from it. Seven great civilizations of the ancient world were reduced to ignorance and superstition, intellectual, techonlogical, cultural and aesthetic destruction by Islam alone. At present the introgression of similar thought has cost us a century during which we still have progressed thanks to consuming the innovations produced largely in the german academy, just like we had advanced by innovations largely produced in scotland before, and england before that.

So yes we will uncover incremental improvements – but in all walks of life. But more importntly, we we do not succeed, if the left’s pseudoscientific replacement for theology isn’t defeated, we’re just as likely to either repeat the dark ages, or worse, succumb to the ignorance and superstition of abrahamic religion version two.

Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation

Reply addressees: @mrcmurgia