Author: Curt Doolittle

  • Yes

    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 po

    (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 rel

    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

    —“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)

    WORTH REPEATING
    (Why the masculine must constrain the pathological feminine) https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1775576013239431293

  • RT @curtdoolittle: @AMaskedMartyr @ScottAdamsSays Thank you so much. Honestly, i

    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, intelle

    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

    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 (pseudos

    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

    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