Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • I just have no respect for you, do not value your existence, your opinion, or yo

    I just have no respect for you, do not value your existence, your opinion, or your agreement, or support. You’re irrelevant because you cannot demonstrate relevance.

    And no I fail to register on psychopathy and sociopathy tests. I do register as slightly on the aspergers spectrum but that only means I’m extremely cognitively masculine.

    I’m also very likely three SD above you in IQ, and from a different historical tradition and class.

    Though I do find humor in your desperate attempts to ‘win’ somehow by appealing to emotions I clearly don’t share, values I don’t share, and failing to make a single argument whatsoever worthy of adult consideration.

    Noblesse oblige: We are responsible for the peasantry but we do not consider them peers. instead somewhere between children and domesticated animals. It’s a very Christian thing. In the Ancient world our aristocratic egalitarianism was simply a matter of utility necessary to increase our numbers such that we could continue to bear responsibility for the commons together despite the women, peasants, slaves, barbarians, and other domesticated animals.

    I love people, all of humanity. But I never imagine equality is other than a vapid attempt by the lesser to obtain yet a different redistribution of self image, status, and influence.

    This is what aristocracy means. It’s just beyond you that such a thing could exist. And that’s why you’re so ignorant of the full spectrum of historical thought, and because of that ignorance, so arrogant in your presumption you are other than a domesticated animal your betters maintain through the illusion of agency.

    The difference is the credentialists and financialists and leninists all seek to steal from you while the remaining fragments of the western aristocratic tradition across all the surviving classes, still try to do their duty of demanding you take responsibility for private and common so that they DON”T need to extract from you.

    Why is this possible? Women defect under democratic government. That’s the only reasons. And they share feminine thinking.

    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @AndreAn97444856 @MinClaydough

    Source date (UTC): 2024-04-02 01:21:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774970362683404288

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774964522312175782

  • ACCUSATIONS OF ESSENTIALISM AS ATTEMPTS AT DECEPTION. I wonder if anyone who use

    ACCUSATIONS OF ESSENTIALISM AS ATTEMPTS AT DECEPTION.
    I wonder if anyone who uses the words essentialism or essentialist (usually fundamentalists or apologists ) has any idea what the term means.

    Causality is what it is. A hierarchical chain that is ascertainable. Conversely,…

    Source date (UTC): 2024-04-02 01:09:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774967479250375136

  • ACCUSATIONS OF ESSENTIALISM AS ATTEMPTS AT DECEPTION. I wonder if anyone who use

    ACCUSATIONS OF ESSENTIALISM AS ATTEMPTS AT DECEPTION.
    I wonder if anyone who uses the words essentialism or essentialist (usually fundamentalists or apologists ) has any idea what the term means.

    Causality is what it is. A hierarchical chain that is ascertainable. Conversely, Essentialism in philosophy is an archaic concept that predates our present understanding of the entire spectrum of the sciences.

    And it’s certainly rather silly in the context of our work documenting first principles from the first cause upward into the full complexity of experience.

    One way to highlight the difference is through the classic example of water. From a scientific perspective, water is H2O – a compound of hydrogen and oxygen that serves multiple evolutionary functions, including as a universal solvent, with specific physical and chemical properties that can be empirically measured and manipulated. Calling something “water” is simply a convenient label for a set of observable characteristics, causal, and consequential relationships – as such it is a method of assisting in testimonial truth and preventing deception, deceit, and fraud.

    But from an essentialist perspective, water might be seen as having an intrinsic “waterness” that goes beyond its physical composition and behavior – a metaphysical essence that makes it what it is, regardless of how humans understand or describe it.

    So this is just another example of disambiguating causality necessary for action from conflating experience, including qualia, and auto-associative properties.

    In other words it’s another example of masculine systematizing over time and feminine empathizing in time – which is the first cause of human differences.

    It is usually used as technique of deception by which to undermine testifiable arguments with the pretense of magical, mystical, or privileged knowledge necessary to preserve bias from defeat by argument and evidence. In other words I have never seen an argument using essentialism as a pejorative that was not a fraud or deception.

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2024-04-02 01:09:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774967479040708608

  • Jesus As The End of The Religious Project? –“… as far as I know, Brad is righ

    Jesus As The End of The Religious Project?
    –“… as far as I know, Brad is right “religion ended with jesus”. What we do next is closer to spiritualism, philosophy, and public ritual.”–

    What does that mean?
    I think he meant that he reduced it to the simplest form that achieves the desired purpose of religion as the production of mindfulness that solves the prisoners’ dilemma of cooperation and trust.
    In that sense I believe he is correct. So if you take the very simple via-negativa of Natural Law and add the very simple via-positiva of the four gospels of jesus then you have the most reductive set of negativa and positiva possible.
    In other words, logic is not justificationary, and truth requires falsification, so the criteria for truth is adversarial competition (darwinian selection so to speak) between a via negativa (what not to do) and a via positiva (what to do).
    As such our solution to Natural Law and Jesus’ teaching (the jeffersonian bible) are the bookends necessary for a complete pursuit of truth and goodness – what remains is duty, excellence, and beauty. And that comes from ancient european aesthetics and philosophy.

    Cheers.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-04-02 00:55:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774963798748565504

  • Rk: style. Go to a men’s stylist, and ask him to suggest a cut that is more suit

    Rk: style. Go to a men’s stylist, and ask him to suggest a cut that is more suitable to your face and less indicative of a toupe. 😉

    If this is an april fools joke I apologize. lol

    Source date (UTC): 2024-04-02 00:41:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774960320319983946

    Reply addressees: @razibkhan

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774920208551194678

  • RT @StevePender: This is what it looks like when a country is conquered through

    RT @StevePender: This is what it looks like when a country is conquered through legislation whose foundational “jugular cuts” were in 1964/…

    Source date (UTC): 2024-04-02 00:39:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774959926701342966

  • RT @elonmusk: 😂

    RT @elonmusk: 😂

    Source date (UTC): 2024-04-02 00:39:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774959857826726257

  • Again, all you are doing is repeatedly demonstrating the feminine technique of t

    Again, all you are doing is repeatedly demonstrating the feminine technique of trying to shame your betters into not leaving you behind.

    If you had any achievements in life. If you could conduct an adult and rational argument. If you had any point at all other than soothing your ego, then you would. But you dont, and it’s likely you can’t, because you lack the agency to exert such intellectual honesty over the influence of your animal instincts.

    I’ve built a series of hundred million dollar companies, bought them around the world, lived around the world, worked in justice and intel, retired early, and solved a series of the ‘hard problems’ in the history of thought. Then opened and institute and begun training others who are willing and able – most of which are extraordinary in their capacity to produce insight. I have demonstrated my competency in multiple fields. What have you done? Why do you have confidence in your instincts, intuitions, thoughts, and convictions? They appear childlike and trivial to me.

    Either you can comprehend my work and that of the others at the institute or you can’t. If you can’t that’s fine. If you can’t grasp why we use this particular vocabulary paradigm grammar and operational logic then that’s either another lack of ability or lack of effort or both.

    You seem to think you are special rather than one of the stream of stereotypical nitwits who are somewhere between failures, outcasts, or underachievers, desperate to find dominance expression in anonymous social media to satisfy your self image and status deficit.

    The staff regularly admonishes me for even paying you the tiniest bit of attention but I do find that about one percent of the time the individual has the capacity to overcome his intuitions or assumptions and then consider the possibility of learning.

    It’s just another science experiment for me.

    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @AndreAn97444856 @MinClaydough

    Source date (UTC): 2024-04-02 00:38:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774959582168621056

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774955085249871893

  • No but elites are woke

    No but elites are woke.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-04-02 00:28:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774956963283009903

    Reply addressees: @MinClaydough @AndreAn97444856

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774956700723724747

  • RT @auny_marie: Women in the Heathen Era 56-115 CE “The [Germanic] husband gives

    RT @auny_marie: Women in the Heathen Era 56-115 CE

    “The [Germanic] husband gives dowry to the wife rather than the other way around. Paren…

    Source date (UTC): 2024-04-02 00:27:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1774956716704072141