Author: Curt Doolittle

  • (…am i the only guy who finds jealousy incredibly unattractive and annoying? s

    (…am i the only guy who finds jealousy incredibly unattractive and annoying? sigh. )


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 11:34:00 UTC

  • RACISM Well, you know, pointing out our differences is all well and good. I want

    RACISM

    Well, you know, pointing out our differences is all well and good. I want to preserve my culture and my extended family and our gene pool too. And I certainly prefer to sacrifice and contribute to my gene pool rather than someone elses. I can’t imagine anything more moral and ethical than that. And I certainly respect the data that shows homogenous societies are superior to diverse societies in every respect.

    But those statements are in the context of city states and a barrier to political participation. With political participation, minorities can attempt to use the state to redistribute status, and with that, create friction and civil conflict that if conducted in the market would be beneficial, but conducted in politics is nothing but destructive.

    I am all for africa for africans, south american for natives, asia for asia, and every other blend of people’s on earth. But I’d also like europe for europeans. And that’s because there is in fact something very special about our culture, or we would not have started the industrial revolution in greece, and restarted in britain.

    So the moral argument is that the ultimate imperative is not redistribution, it is to create an environment where all extended families can compete in the market according to their abilities, biase and preferences without relying on majority tyranny to oppress one another.

    WHile I don’t feel guilty for the white man’s burden so to speak: I am happy that we dragged humanity out of ignorance and poverty with consumer capitalism and as the remainder of the world reluctantly secularized into the corporeal consumer capitalist system, I think westerners should take credit for it. No matter how badly they did it. No one changes the world easily and we destroyed our civilization in the process. if there is any price to be paid we have paid it.

    No more guilt. Ever.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 11:12:00 UTC

  • WHY ASIANS LAG : THE PROBLEM OF +106 VERBAL IQ : PARETO REVISITED While spatial

    WHY ASIANS LAG : THE PROBLEM OF +106 VERBAL IQ : PARETO REVISITED

    While spatial IQ is very good for workers, engineers, and scientists, we must remember that CONTRARY to Marxist and now dominant postmodern western economic intuitions that have been derived from the ERRONEOUS labor theory of value, that ORGANIZING production is what is difficult, not production itself. Organizing requires persuasion and negotiation and collaboration. We are generally compensated for ORGANIZING society into vast networks of production of goods and services, and REORGANIZING society as needed. This is the job of entrepreneurs. And it is somewhat surprising that our Austrian forbears only got it sort of half right. They corrected the Marxists, but they din’t quite solve the problem for us. It isn’t efficiency or prices that really matter, it is using price and efficiency information in order to organize production using people and capital and supplying them with incentives.

    THAT IS VERBAL WORK. THAT VERBAL WORK REQUIRES A PRECISE LANGUAGE as well as precise property definitions and precise laws for the resolution of conflicts.

    My argument is that this is the Pareto Principle in effect. In every nation 20% controls 80% of the capital. And there is a good reason for that. Because that capital is used to organize the production of consumer goods. It is not ‘consumed’ It is used to manage society’s dynamic and chaotic, and entirely schumpeterian means of production.

    In order for those people to succeed, both they and the rest of the administrative and operations people that flow from them must be able to negotiate by expressing ideas in increasingly articulated form.

    —EXCERPT FROM LE GRIFFE DU LION’s WHY ASIANS LAG—

    “In market economies, per capita GDP is directly proportional to the population fraction with verbal IQ equal to or greater than 106.

    “Smart Fraction Theory recognizes that smart people produce wealth. It asserts that a nation’s per capita GDP varies directly with the fraction of its population that is smart. SFT II changes the definition of “smart” by linking it to verbal IQ instead of general IQ. SFT II asserts:

    “***In market economies, per capita GDP is directly proportional to the population fraction with verbal IQ at or above some determinable threshold.***

    “Verbal IQ is a score derived from verbal subtests of an IQ test. The subtests measure abilities like abstract and common sense reasoning, language comprehension, short-term auditory memory, concentration, attention, word knowledge, verbal fluency and social judgment. It is the kind of intelligence that serves lawyers well. I actually prefer the term “verbal-analytical IQ.”

    “Their IQ is bifurcated. NE Asians have the highest IQ of all peoples other than Ashkenazim. They owe that superior IQ, however, to extraordinary visuospatial ability, which, despite verbal shortcomings, lifts their IQ above that of Europeans.

    “The bifurcation is evident in the workplace where, for example, fully-assimilated second and third generation NE Asian Americans are overrepresented in science, medicine and engineering, and underrepresented in law, social science and the humanities. According to the 1999 National Science Foundation survey of PhDs awarded to US citizens and permanent residents, Asian Americans earned 11% of the science and engineering PhDs but less than 5% of other PhDs.

    “Is it that NE Asians perform less well than Europeans on verbal subtests?

    “[Yes,] but there is other evidence of their verbal deficiency. Take the bar exam for example. In 1989, the Law School Admission Council commissioned a study of bar passage rates. Its report, The LSAC National Longitudinal Bar Passage Study was published in 1998, with results disaggregated by race and ethnicity. Linda F. Wightman, the project head, collected data from more than 27,000 students who entered ABA approved law schools in fall 1991. The study found that only 80.75% of Asians passed the bar on the first try compared with 91.93% of non-Hispanic whites. This corresponds to a white-Asian mean-score difference of 0.53 standard deviation or in IQ terms a verbal gap of 8 points!

    “Unfortunately, Wightman put NE Asians into one big Asian box along with Filipinos, Hmong and others whose IQs are more than a standard deviation lower than Chinese, Koreans and Japanese. It is true that relatively few from low-IQ groups make it to the bar exam, but some do. Consequently, 8 points must be regarded as an upper bound to the white-NE Asian verbal gap.

    “R. Lynn reviewed the literature on racial IQ in The Mankind Quarterly, 31:3, Spring 1991, 255-296. IQ averages for Caucasoids, Mongoloids, Negroids, Negroid-Caucasoid hybrids, Amerindians and South East Asians were reported. More than 100 studies were referenced, most from peer-reviewed journals and not a small number from Lynn himself. Of these, 12 reported both general and verbal IQ averages for NE Asians. Three of the 12 indicated a white-NE Asian verbal IQ gap of about 8 points in agreement with the bar exam result, but these are at the high end. The average verbal gap was a bit less than 4 points or about a quarter standard deviation.

    “Among the races, only NE Asians and Amerindians exhibit this particular kind of verbal-nonverbal cognitive split. For other races verbal and general IQ averages have similar values, making the distinction between the two transparent to smart fraction theory. In the 12 studies reporting both general and verbal IQ for NE Asians, the general-verbal gap averaged 6.5 IQ points.”


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 09:36:00 UTC

  • (quick thought) (serious) (important) DARK ENLIGHTENMENT AND CONSERVATISM VS LIB

    (quick thought) (serious) (important)

    DARK ENLIGHTENMENT AND CONSERVATISM VS LIBERTARIANISM AND INCENTIVES

    More on this later, but I see the problem that we are going to have with the conservatives and their fancy with biology.

    If we remember that the conservative aristocratic method of thinking is very much one of reproduction and family. It’s tribal. It’s cognizant of BREEDING. A word that has been dropped, but was very common in aristocratic egalitarian history. Breeding was an important consideration both in the family and on the farm. Darwin just explained why. But BREEDING has always been part of our history.

    The conservatives have latched onto epigenetic transmission. And I think it’s a rat hole. Even if it’s true, it tells us only that we can evolve FASTER. But it doesn’t tell us much about what changes and how much. Worse, it’s very hard to logically construct a reason why any such change is more significant than the formal and informal institutions that we can construct. Certainly literacy and law are faster means of adaptation than epigenetic transmission every would be.

    So this is why our ideas are even more important. INCENTIVES. Our analysis of property rights and our praxeological analysis of incentives, tells us what institutions we can and cannot build because of incentives rather than relying on norms or intuitions.

    But conservatives reject outright, as either specious or ‘evil’ any presumption that rational arguments such as incentives, are superior to intuitive arguments. (That’s crazy, I agree. But thats how they think.) And they are partly right because the vast majority of people rely on moral intuitions. its ONLY libertarians who rely on MORAL REASONING. If that sinks in. It will partly explain our failure to spread our arguments in the population.

    So what I am not quite settled on – even given that Propertarianism makes all political, ethical and moral arguments commensurable, is how to construct an argument that conservatives will adopt, even if it suits their purposes, because rational arguments are NOT intuitive arguments and only intuitive arguments are ‘appreciated’ by conservatives.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 07:50:00 UTC

  • ON THE HIERARCHY OF ETHICAL MODELS AND ARGUMENTS. HIERARCHY OF ETHICAL SYSTEMS 1

    ON THE HIERARCHY OF ETHICAL MODELS AND ARGUMENTS.

    HIERARCHY OF ETHICAL SYSTEMS

    1) Virtue Ethics (imitation)

    2) Rule Ethics (deontological ethics)

    3) Outcome Ethics (teleological ethics)

    All of us that we describe as functioning humans can imitate the virtuous. As we mature we can understand the value of normative rules. As we gain wisdom and knowledge we can grasp the different outcomes that are produced by nuances. But more importantly, ethics are the list of rules by which we are forgiven for our errors, and lauded for our successes. We will not be chastised as a child for imitating virtue even if we err. We will not be chastised as an adult for following ethical rules, even if we err. We will not be chastised in our late maturity for following teleological ethics even if we err.

    HIERARCHY OF ETHICAL ARGUMENTS

    1) Sentimental

    2) Moral

    3) Rational

    4) Scientific

    5) Economic

    6) Ratio-Scientific (including economics)

    WE HUMANS EXIST IN VARIOUS AGES, with various knowledge, with various cognitive abilities. We must all cooperate given those differences. We must give the young and inexperienced what they can use, and the wizened and aged what they can use. And we must work together with our youth and age to cooperate for mutually beneficial ends.

    FOR ANY POLITICAL MOVEMENT TO SUCCEED it must produce the entire suite of arguments. Because humans can only grasp some maximum level of argument given their abilities and knowledge at any given point. If you wait until all members can argue ratio-scientifically then you will never achieve your political goals. If you argue sentimentally and morally you can never defeat your opponents.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 05:00:00 UTC

  • YOU CAN’T FIX “INBRED” “In Iraq, as in much of the region, nearly half of all ma

    YOU CAN’T FIX “INBRED”

    “In Iraq, as in much of the region, nearly half of all married couples are first or second cousins to each other. A 1986 study of 4,500 married hospital patients and staff in Baghdad found that 46% were wed to a first or second cousin, while a smaller 1989 survey found 53% were “consanguineously” married. “

    Cousin Marriage is the primary reason for the low trust society.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 04:01:00 UTC

  • (local saying) “Man must be only little better looking than gorilla.” Well, in t

    (local saying)

    “Man must be only little better looking than gorilla.”

    Well, in this culture, it’s pretty hard to keep up with the women.

    🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 03:38:00 UTC

  • What do you do when you come home and your significant other is cooking Italian

    What do you do when you come home and your significant other is cooking Italian in lingerie, and the table is set with burning candles?

    God loves me today.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-07 15:07:00 UTC

  • WHY PROPERTARIAN REASONING IS THE ANSWER TO MORAL ARGUMENT. “I work entirely by

    WHY PROPERTARIAN REASONING IS THE ANSWER TO MORAL ARGUMENT.

    “I work entirely by arguing with incentives. And I unload them as much as possible. We may not agree on the experience produced by any action, but the transfers produced by any action exist independently of how we react to them. And incentives are nothing more than values attached to transfers.”

    In other words ALL EMOTIONAL AND MORAL STATEMENTS AND EXPERIENCES can be reduced to statements of the transfer of property, and our differences merely different expectations over the distribution of property rights between the private and the common.

    **Propertarianism is what Praxeology should have been if it was complete.**


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-07 11:36:00 UTC

  • (Office antics) “No one takes me seriously. Have you noticed?” “No. We haven’t n

    (Office antics)

    “No one takes me seriously. Have you noticed?”

    “No. We haven’t noticed.” (Laughter)

    Sigh. Why am I such a great target for teasing? My whole life. lol. I guess that it means your staff is comfortable with you. (I think. I hope.)


    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-07 10:12:00 UTC