Curt Doolittle

Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

  • GOES ALL CRITIQUE ON TROLLS Caplan’s a good guy. But using Psychological Critiqu

    http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2015/06/the_psychology_3.htmlCAPLAN GOES ALL CRITIQUE ON TROLLS

    Caplan’s a good guy. But using Psychological Critique to criticize Trolls is so painfully ironic that I cant bear it.

    http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2015/06/the_psychology_3.html

    —————-

    Brian,

    Or we could just adopt the strategy of analyzing incentives, and continue the longstanding criticism of psychology as a pseudoscience. And that all use of psychological criticism is merely ‘Critique’ (Gossip for the purpose of shaming and rallying.) It is a sophisticated deceit, but a deceit none the less.

    Trolls want attention. They found a way to get attention. They vent frustration. It’s not complicated. Why is it that they aren’t getting attention. And how can we provide negative incentives for their behavior?

    (And how can we keep Putin’s foot soldiers in St Petersburg off the internet entirely.)

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-02 06:00:00 UTC

  • San Andreas. Listen. Smoking Crack doesn’t improve your script writing

    San Andreas.

    Listen. Smoking Crack doesn’t improve your script writing.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-01 16:03:00 UTC

  • Awesome

    http://www.aei.org/publication/instead-of-killing-americas-shale-revolution-with-increased-production-the-saudis-have-jump-started-shale-2-0/Obvious. Awesome

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-01 01:03:00 UTC

  • WITH CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE MEME”

    http://www.businessinsider.com/beautiful-people-get-more-job-interviews-2013-9″CONTRAST WITH CHECK YOUR PRIVILEGE MEME”

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-29 05:32:00 UTC

  • This wiki article is propaganda. It seems to positions ingroups and outgroups as

    This wiki article is propaganda. It seems to positions ingroups and outgroups as psychological phantasms. It has a section labeled ‘Postulated role in human evolution’. The genetic basis of ingroup/outgroup is essential to propertarianism. This cannot stand. It will be fun to help erase this mysticism.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-27 20:17:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://wpo.st/Pt0J0

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-26 05:44:00 UTC

  • The colonies return to…. That’s a spin I haven’t heard

    http://thosewhocansee.blogspot.com/2015/05/why-re-colonization-future-orientation.htmlOuch. The colonies return to….

    That’s a spin I haven’t heard.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-26 05:20:00 UTC

  • Greg. Really interesting to hear you POV on TRS. You have the narrative down. Go

    Greg. Really interesting to hear you POV on TRS. You have the narrative down. Good speaker. Articulate. -Cheers.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-25 02:09:00 UTC

  • Noah, I can throw an wrench in the saltwater either-or comparison and say this:

    Noah,

    I can throw an wrench in the saltwater either-or comparison and say this:

    That if saltwater economists and justify pseudo-scientific morality, then why can’t freshwater economists defend morality with pseudo-scientific models.

    The problem isn’t that one side or the other errs. It’s that both sides err.

    Why do politicians and voters react positively to freshwater arguments, and negatively to saltwater arguments?

    Is it because they are ill informed? Or is because justifying morality poorly is preferable to justifying immorality well.

    And lest you suggest that morals are subjective, one would have to answer why cooperation is preferable to non-cooperation. It is only preferable if it is not parasitic for the individual – not if it is merely Pareto optimal in the aggregate.

    And why is this conflict raging in economics and politics?

    The underlying question is one of familialism, tribalism and dysgenia – is our society moral or not? Is heterogeneity a good or a bad?

    And that is too uncomfortable a question for the Academy to answer.

    Which is why some of us are out here trying to answer it.

    Uncomfortable truth that it is.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-24 12:01:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/the-end-of-the-natural-family-liberalism/

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-24 02:25:00 UTC