Yes.
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 20:04:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782500784396976368
Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS @alessabocchi
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782491515090043362
Yes.
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 20:04:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782500784396976368
Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS @alessabocchi
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782491515090043362
(Social Media Ethics)
I should just use this as part of my signature on every post. 😉
–“I suspect you may be smart enough to understand this post but that you might need exposition for the purpose of clarification. So please ask if necessary. But under no circumstances assume I err (I don’t), and instead, seek to understand, such that we may find fault with either person’s understanding or communication.”—
Cheers.
😉
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 20:02:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782500176461983744
RT @curtdoolittle: @cryptodiaries @swpwilliams @alessabocchi —“Your causal relationship is wrong. It’s not Women’s Rights -> Prosperity.…
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 20:00:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782499648512438593
—“Your causal relationship is wrong. It’s not Women’s Rights -> Prosperity. It’s Prosperity -> Women’s rights. Just like Racism does not lead to differential performance. Differential performance sometimes leads to racism.”– @cryptodiaries
We all make mistakes. But I rarely err, and I do not in this circumstance.
If you had any concept of the national or civilizational balance sheet of demonstrated interests in the spectrum of capital, you would never make such a foolish statement.
I see from your fourth sentence
1. race observation is correct
2. you’re presuming it’s a matter of differential performance rather than differential instinct between sex differences in cognition and the result.
3. You’re also incorrect in the first three sentences because it is precisely prosperity that leads to women’s rights and economic contribution. But you’re not stating that it leads to intertemporal institutional hazards, vastly expanding consumption and the negative consequences, the illusion of endless growth, the expansion of debt to accommodate it all, and the destruction of all organizations from social to educational, to economic to political because of this sequence of hyperconsumption WITHOUT the demand for responsibility for capital accumulation and preservation both in and across time.
I suspect you may be smart enough to understand this but that you might need exposition for the purpose of clarification, so please ask if necessary. But under no circumstances assume I err (I don’t), and instead, seek to understand, such that we may find fault with either person’s understanding or communication.
Affections;
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation
Reply addressees: @cryptodiaries @swpwilliams @alessabocchi
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 19:59:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782499609882906624
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782482915374338129
WORTH REPEATING
(Why the masculine must constrain the pathological feminine) https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1775576013239431293
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 19:51:35 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782497499577483497
https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1775576013239431293
RT @curtdoolittle: @AMaskedMartyr @ScottAdamsSays Thank you so much. Honestly, it’s an honor to answer respectfully asked, intellectually h…
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 19:49:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782496947380633863
Thank you so much. Honestly, it’s an honor to answer respectfully asked, intellectually honest questions.
-hugs
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 19:49:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782496847719784792
Reply addressees: @AMaskedMartyr @ScottAdamsSays
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782496452201124205
THE UNIVERSE, AND ALL IN IT, IS EVEN MORE SIMPLE THAN WE ASSUMED.
And we humans are at the bleeding edge of evolutionary computation of complexity.
RE: –“Entropy does not decrease”– @curtraymond
That’s absolutely false. 😉
That’s what matter consists of: increases in organization by increases in density (negative entropy).
One might say that entropy never ceases, but that doesn’t mean that the by product of entropy isn’t all of material existence and it’s effects until all the energy in the universe settles to the zero point (dead).
Matter accumulates by the ternary logic of evolutionary computation, which can easily be illustrated with Markov Chains.
Something which Stephen Wolfram @stephen_wolfram is doing in his research and development work: evolutionary computation by competition between hierarchies of randomly processing Markov chains – with which he is quite successfully demonstrating the determinism of the universe’s constitution and ending the theory of the ‘finely tuned’ universe, and consequently putting another stake in the vampire heart of creationism.
And no I don’t err. We all make mistakes. But I very rarely err. And in this case I certainly do not. ;). Why? The universe is quite simple. almost disturbingly so, and certainly humbling. 😉
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation
Reply addressees: @curtraymond @ScottAdamsSays
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 19:48:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782496696296992768
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782493225686630568
RT @curtdoolittle: @AMaskedMartyr @ScottAdamsSays RE: SIMULATION THEORY
(pseudoscience, sophistry, ‘religion’.)
–“Q:Curt:Could I get you t…
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 19:35:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782493528188141714
RE: SIMULATION THEORY
(pseudoscience, sophistry, ‘religion’.)
–“Q:Curt:Could I get you to spell out for me how simulation theory reflects the behavior of human memory?”—@AMaskedMartyr
Always happy to answer intellectually honest questions respectfully asked. 😉
We reconstruct memories constantly in response to present modeling, patterning, and understanding. ie: reverse causality.
Add to this that while we perceive space and time within our range of sense and perception with extraordinary accuracy for any purpose for which we are capable of acting.
However, we project our auto-associative ‘predictions’ (imaginations) upon that accurate perception and thus create cause and consequence in our imaginations from the oft ignorant, erroneous, if not absurd content we have managed to accumulate in memory over time.
So, we differ within the margins of human indifference, in ability, in bias, in experience, in knowledge, and as such in presumptions. And we project a near infinite fiction both causal(back) and consequential (forward) on top of local sense perception (present).
Reality however remains objective and consistent independent of of those differences in our projections – and that’s why we require such a thing as truth: decidability – so that it is still possible to cooperate on means if not ends, when there are differences in our perceptions of cause and consequence.
Simulation theory is nonsense.
But you know, from what I understand at the moment, the discipline of philosophy is essentially dead and has been for as long as physics has been failing.
Affections;
Please feel free to ask questions for clarification.
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
The Science of Cooperation
Reply addressees: @AMaskedMartyr @ScottAdamsSays
Source date (UTC): 2024-04-22 19:35:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782493488149303296
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1782481684635488341