Author: Curt Doolittle

  • Honesty, Intelligence, and Race OpenPsych , July 17, 2023 As if we needed more e

    Honesty, Intelligence, and Race
    OpenPsych , July 17, 2023
    https://t.co/BgLLPZ2cFs

    As if we needed more evidence. The only people on earth who speak truth before face. And the entire left’s program is meant to undermine it – as is nearly every woman in the west :(. ) It’s a paper by Kirkegaard with his usually zeal.

    –“Research shows that honesty correlates positively with intelligence. Similarly, there are racial differences in honesty, with Europeans being more honest than various other ethnic groups. It is currently unknown to what degree race differences in intelligence can explain the differences in honesty. …

    We replicate prior findings that honesty correlated with measures of intelligence (r = .38, 95% CI [.34, .41]) and that Blacks (d = -0.67, 95% CI [-.76, -.59]) and Hispanics (d = -0.4, 95% CI [-.50, -.31]) are less honest than Whites, and this holds whether honesty is measured by self-reports, interviewer-reports or by parent-reports.

    In addition, race differences in honesty remained between Blacks and Whites but not between Whites and Hispanics after controlling for intelligence. Differences between Blacks and Whites but not Whites and Hispanics were noticeably lower in self-reports (Blacks: d = -0.18 [-0.24, -0.11], Hispanics: d = -0.24 [-0.31, -0.17]) than parent-reports (Blacks: d = -0.43 [-0.52, -0.35], Hispanics: -0.24 [-0.33, -0.15]) and interviewer-reports (Blacks: d = -0.7 [-0.75, -0.64], Hispanics: -0.3 [-0.36, -0.25]).

    Cross-national comparisons were made using national IQ data and Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. Bayesian model averaging suggests that Hofstede’s individualism dimension (β = .64, PIP = 100%), national IQs (β = .25, PIP = 73.6%), and masculinity (β = -.35, PIP = 100%) predict differences in honesty between countries.

    (CD: Meaning? Collectivism breeds dishonesty.)

    Parking violations per diplomat were only predicted by national IQs (r = -0.28, p < .001), given that no other variable reached a posterior inclusion probability above 0% besides national IQs. Implications and theories concerning these findings are discussed.”–

    (CD: I’m going to fetch that data on parking violations per diplomat and add it to my Countries table of data.)


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-19 00:24:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748139224820301824

  • Honesty, Intelligence, and Race OpenPsych , July 17, 2023 As if we needed more e

    Honesty, Intelligence, and Race
    OpenPsych , July 17, 2023
    https://t.co/BgLLPZ2cFs

    As if we needed more evidence. The only people on earth who speak truth before face. And the entire left’s program is meant to undermine it – as is nearly every woman in the west :(. ) It’s a paper by Kirkegaard with his usually zeal.

    –“Research shows that honesty correlates positively with intelligence. Similarly, there are racial differences in honesty, with Europeans being more honest than various other ethnic groups. It is currently unknown to what degree race differences in intelligence can explain the differences in honesty. …

    We replicate prior findings that honesty correlated with measures of intelligence (r = .38, 95% CI [.34, .41]) and that Blacks (d = -0.67, 95% CI [-.76, -.59]) and Hispanics (d = -0.4, 95% CI [-.50, -.31]) are less honest than Whites, and this holds whether honesty is measured by self-reports, interviewer-reports or by parent-reports.

    In addition, race differences in honesty remained between Blacks and Whites but not between Whites and Hispanics after controlling for intelligence. Differences between Blacks and Whites but not Whites and Hispanics were noticeably lower in self-reports (Blacks: d = -0.18 [-0.24, -0.11], Hispanics: d = -0.24 [-0.31, -0.17]) than parent-reports (Blacks: d = -0.43 [-0.52, -0.35], Hispanics: -0.24 [-0.33, -0.15]) and interviewer-reports (Blacks: d = -0.7 [-0.75, -0.64], Hispanics: -0.3 [-0.36, -0.25]).

    Cross-national comparisons were made using national IQ data and Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. Bayesian model averaging suggests that Hofstede’s individualism dimension (β = .64, PIP = 100%), national IQs (β = .25, PIP = 73.6%), and masculinity (β = -.35, PIP = 100%) predict differences in honesty between countries.

    (CD: Meaning? Collectivism breeds dishonesty.)

    Parking violations per diplomat were only predicted by national IQs (r = -0.28, p < .001), given that no other variable reached a posterior inclusion probability above 0% besides national IQs. Implications and theories concerning these findings are discussed.”–

    (CD: I’m going to fetch that data on parking violations per diplomat and add it to my Countries table of data.)


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-19 00:23:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748139069211549697

  • I”m not black pilled. I just have my days like anyone else. And I learned a few

    I”m not black pilled.
    I just have my days like anyone else. And I learned a few years ago that emoting on social media abit was successful in ending the suspicion that I might be an artificial intelligence….

    (I”m not convinced myself yet, but I keep trying…. 😉 )

    Truth is that the team is right that I have a set of values and sacred cows where I want to imagine the world is peopled with better humans than it is, and I seem to chafe at every bit of evidence to the contrary ….. I want to preserve my illusions like everyone else. 😉 That’s evidence I’m human I guess..

    Reply addressees: @BuffJones2


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-18 23:58:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748132749171458048

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748128198368354751

  • @WerrellBradley Interesting. It has taken Brad almost three years, starting with

    @WerrellBradley
    Interesting. It has taken Brad almost three years, starting with reading one of my 400 page drafts to the point where today he writes proofs in algorithmic sequence in operational prose using vocabulary consisting of measurements. I’d be proud of writing his recent pieces myself. They’re excellent.

    Now of course, brad is from the upper classes, from academic parentage, has an advanced degree, is extremely well read. So I can’t really say ‘if he can do it so can you’ with any seriousness. 😉 But if you look at any number of our better people who I will not name, but are not part of the organization directly, they can do it too. So can you. It’s just a heck of a lot of work retraining your brain to ‘science it’ so to speak. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-18 23:53:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748131499293978624

  • Noblessé Oblige is a Duty That Natural Law Demands —“Noblesse obligé does actu

    Noblessé Oblige is a Duty That Natural Law Demands

    —“Noblesse obligé does actually exist, just not the way most people imagine it. It doesn’t matter if people “deserve it” or not. It’s your duty to provide it, because that’s what Natural Law requires of you. It’s why you… https://t.co/jPR35Hqxrp


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-18 23:49:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748130460843004193

  • Have I told you that you’re awesome lately? Seriously. Sometimes I think you’re

    Have I told you that you’re awesome lately? Seriously. Sometimes I think you’re the only sane person on the right. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-18 23:46:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748129719344586776

    Reply addressees: @radiofreenw

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748124388267119054

  • “Curt, please explain “animal rights” in your system.”— Great Question. My sys

    —“Curt, please explain “animal rights” in your system.”—

    Great Question. My system is just science. But that’s ok. 😉

    It is not a necessity, it’s a utility, and as a utility, it’s a political choice. So let’s explain why we should protect animals (and nature for that matter), and I bet I’ll do a better job than most. 😉

    1) Technically speaking, an animal can’t have a right because no right can exist that can’t be reciprocated.

    2) However, like children, the infirmed, and the disabled, who cannot engage in the exchange of reciprocal rights obligations and inalienations, we can agree among ourselves to grant them protections rather than rights – where the protection is equal in practice to the right, but unlike rights, the protection must be exercised by someone or some group on their behalf – as they lack the capacity.

    3) However, this does not settle the problem of a difference between our opinions of what those protections consist of. The prohibition on cruelty is rather obvious to all. The use of animals as a resource is not so obvious to all, despite that

    4) The logic of these protections is not sophisticated.
    (a) preserve an asset or rather an ecology of assets that are a resource for humans emotionally, psychologically, socially, politically, and economically as well.
    (b) continue the slow development and reinforcement of the value of life, and the prohibition on aggression, harm, and suffering worldwide.
    (c) prevent the expression and habituation of behaviors by humans against animals that might be eventually extended to humans – which only serves to amplify (b).
    (d) filter people who we do not wish among us – which I might add as a personal note, is excessive.
    (e) at the cost of having to care for and protect such animals.

    Note that I did not mention the feminine tendency to misapply empathy that evolution provided her for the care of her offspring, the offspring of the extended family, clan and tribe, other women, and men under duress.

    One of the problems we face in the present era is that puberty extends the nervous system of the female such that it can keep track of the states of her offspring. Yet, without those offspring women then misuse that empathy as well as drama creation, emotional manipulation, the hyperconsumption and hypergamy, virtue signalling, gossiping, shaming, rallying undermining and canceling because like male dominance expression in competition for status, females can not resist exercising those impulsive emotional stimulations either.

    In fact, the above problems of women in unregulated schooling, with limited parenting, exposed to the virtue signal warfare of social media, absent responsibilities of the workplace, absent responsibility for siblings, absent regular hormonal cycles because of the pill, absent responsibility for compromise with a mate, and most importantly absence of responsibility for offspring, and the offspring of other women, are in no small part if not the most part, the primary cause of political conflict and the collapse of education, society, morals, traditions, institutions, and even our laws.

    Men have had fifty thousand years to develop means of limiting each other’s behavior – and it most of it occurred in the past ten thousand. Women have only had a century, and unfortunately self regulation is much harder for women than men – so women require other women to socially limit them which is why women excel at social construction of behavior. … Because women need it from each other. Just a do children need it from mothers.

    So, to answer the question of animal rights I must answer the entire scope of causality that brings up the question and in doing so I create the potential for offense, but offense that if felt is then a necessity to feel and adapt to.

    Animals can be given protections that are the equivalent of rights but they cannot have rights because it is impossible for them to exchange that right, and rights can only exist if they are mirrored by an obligation where both right and obligation are inalienable.

    Cheers
    CD

    Reply addressees: @Saurabh_Shah1


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-18 23:45:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748129544341426178

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748102884309508483

  • “A large percent, and perhaps most, of left, center, and right, simply don’t des

    “A large percent, and perhaps most, of left, center, and right, simply don’t deserve saving from themselves, independent of whether they can be saved from each other, or the pseudo elites both foreign and domestic, who set them against one another to gain power over them, with the false promise of better results than we demonstrated before they divided our people with those false promises.”


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-18 23:20:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748123238859702272

  • RT @WerrellBradley: THE SCIENCE BEHIND THE PURITY SPIRAL Human beings seek to im

    RT @WerrellBradley: THE SCIENCE BEHIND THE PURITY SPIRAL

    Human beings seek to improve their Social Status, which represents the Discount o…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-18 22:56:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748117276396601594

  • Poetisch. Wahrheit. Charmant. 😉

    Poetisch. Wahrheit. Charmant. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-18 20:09:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748075108818661825

    Reply addressees: @BsLehrer

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748074631813103958