Curt Doolittle

Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • There is only one

    Apr 21, 2020, 7:17 PM All domesticable animals are the same; all un-domesticable animals are different. All happy families are the same; all unhappy families are different. All transcendent human organizations are the same; all human organizations that stagnate or decline are different. All existentially possible universes are the same; all existentially impossible universes are different. Many things must go right for any civilization to transcend. Minimum divergence from physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. There is only one.

  • There is only one

    Apr 21, 2020, 7:17 PM All domesticable animals are the same; all un-domesticable animals are different. All happy families are the same; all unhappy families are different. All transcendent human organizations are the same; all human organizations that stagnate or decline are different. All existentially possible universes are the same; all existentially impossible universes are different. Many things must go right for any civilization to transcend. Minimum divergence from physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. There is only one.

  • We Differ in Priority Not in Purpose

    Apr 22, 2020, 6:21 PM My argument is that the faithful cannot abandon belief, and the rational cannot adopt faith – and that the tendency in favor of either is demonstrably genetic as well as cultural in origin. We cannot legislate belief or unbelief. So all we can do is trade. Traditionally european civilization has practiced trifunctionalism: the militiary-masculine(dominance)-political, and the commercial-judicial, and the religious-feminine(submissive)-familial. And as such we can trade loyalty to one another under natural law. The law is empirical and reciprocal and trade is the only possible means of reciprocity between the aristocratic-martial and the noble-faithful. The purpose here is to (a) remind both parties that we have always been tri-functional, and it is part of our success, (b) that the difference is priority between Pagan (heroic) martial, heathen(scientific) legal, and christian (subservient) faithful – not a difference but a difference in priority. (c) that we can trade loyalty to one another (d) that this is what we have always done. (e) and that I can only write the law that moderates dominance-force and submission-resistance with scientific law. I am a heathen(judicial-nature) first, a pagan(martial-war) second, and a christian(faith-love) third. But I am all three. Because that is my ROLE in civilization. Each of us that ‘cares’ fulfills a role in the hierarchy of the three competing groups of elites. We advance a strategy under elites of Martial-Defense, Legal-Scientific, or Faithful-Resistance 

    Six Permutations of Priority:
M=Martial .. L=Legal .... F= Faithful
M L F .... .... L F M .... .... F L M
M F L .... .... L M F .... .... F M L

    We divide the labor of our civilization, not by exclusivity but by priority of our three weapons of influence.

  • We Differ in Priority Not in Purpose

    Apr 22, 2020, 6:21 PM My argument is that the faithful cannot abandon belief, and the rational cannot adopt faith – and that the tendency in favor of either is demonstrably genetic as well as cultural in origin. We cannot legislate belief or unbelief. So all we can do is trade. Traditionally european civilization has practiced trifunctionalism: the militiary-masculine(dominance)-political, and the commercial-judicial, and the religious-feminine(submissive)-familial. And as such we can trade loyalty to one another under natural law. The law is empirical and reciprocal and trade is the only possible means of reciprocity between the aristocratic-martial and the noble-faithful. The purpose here is to (a) remind both parties that we have always been tri-functional, and it is part of our success, (b) that the difference is priority between Pagan (heroic) martial, heathen(scientific) legal, and christian (subservient) faithful – not a difference but a difference in priority. (c) that we can trade loyalty to one another (d) that this is what we have always done. (e) and that I can only write the law that moderates dominance-force and submission-resistance with scientific law. I am a heathen(judicial-nature) first, a pagan(martial-war) second, and a christian(faith-love) third. But I am all three. Because that is my ROLE in civilization. Each of us that ‘cares’ fulfills a role in the hierarchy of the three competing groups of elites. We advance a strategy under elites of Martial-Defense, Legal-Scientific, or Faithful-Resistance 

    Six Permutations of Priority:
M=Martial .. L=Legal .... F= Faithful
M L F .... .... L F M .... .... F L M
M F L .... .... L M F .... .... F M L

    We divide the labor of our civilization, not by exclusivity but by priority of our three weapons of influence.

  • The Cognitive Origins of Conspiracy and Oppression Theories

    A conspiracy theory requires that one attribute incentives that fail the test of occam’s razor, almost always because the individual is a social outlier, and has limited sensitivity to, experience with, or knowledge and understanding of how people operate in large groups. Conspiracy theory is the equivalent of dunning kruger failure of personal assessment, projected upon interpersonal and social assessment. In both cases the individual attributes greater ability, agency, and logic to the self and others than they have, because of mistrust, because they do not trust either their own cognition, others, or both. This is why conspiracy theory (systemization) tends to be a male category of cognitive failure, and oppression (personalization) tends to be a female category of cognitive failure. However, we note that in both the Male conspiracy theory and the female oppression cognitive failures, that the parties do not seek to understand the incentives of the individuals they are judging, or to falsify their conspiracy or oppression narratives. There is a reason for it. The human mind operates by building a world model ‘fit for it’s physical, emotional, psychological, and mental budget’. A physiological, emotional, and cognitive economy. This is why people who are ill, depressed, tired, at different points of the day, rested, healthy, excited, or joyous all perceive the same world slighlty differently In both conspiracy and oppression cognitive failures, the individual has defended his or her desperate attempt to suppress the feeling of being out of control of his or her life (due to his or her cognitive limitations), by false self-promise of comprehension. Status is our human accounting system. There are healthy and unhealthy means of suppression emotional panic from cognitive failure to find a means of obtaining success (status) in the social, economic, and political marketplace. Agency (success), Truth / Knowledge / Understanding (acceptance), Philosophy (settlement), Theology-Religion (detachment), Self Discipline (buddhism,stoicism), Ritual/Sport-exercise/hypersocializatin(exposure), Conspiracy and Oppression (withdrawal) narratives are the most common means of providing mindfulness. It’s not hard to see how the consequences of deviation from Knowledge escalate. So, both oppression and conspiracy behaviors are expressions of proto-depression, or prolonged depression from the continuous failure of one’s ideas about one’s self and others and what is in other’s abilities and interests. And That’s because evolution insured that we would remain optimistic to survive in the face of incredible stresses when continued existence is no longer rational. Exhaust all possible explanation for rational choice prior to default to malincentives (conspiracy of intent). In most cases it’s conspiracy of organizational incentives, conspiracy of common interests, conspiracy of genetic bias (such as the ashkenazi adoption of the female strategy), ignorance, error, or stupidity. If you exhaust all of the possible rational incentives then only malincentives remain. But rare. Never attribute to intention what is the product of either incentives, ignorance, or stupidity. Humans by and large justify what they do post hoc with a story. Humans by ad large pursue self interests that they can justify with a story afterward. Because that’s what our brains do. And frankly the more responsibility you have, for the more people, for more risk, the more you have to compromise between different sets of unacceptable externalities that are the cost of getting whatever it s you’re doing done with the resources available, time available, people you have to work with, and incentives you can provide. Most organizational failure that we interpret as conspiracy is the result of people in organizations that are producing malincentives by accident rather than by design. Most groups that engage in evil are doing so because they consider what they’re doing a good. As I’m fond of saying, serial killers justify what they do, and the mothers of serial killers justify what they’ve done, and the fathers of serial killers are happy to throw away the key if not pull the lever. So if it is other than a conspiracy of intention, our problem is not to wish for better humans, but to rule with the humans we have, using the law and incentives to prevent malincentives.

  • The Cognitive Origins of Conspiracy and Oppression Theories

    A conspiracy theory requires that one attribute incentives that fail the test of occam’s razor, almost always because the individual is a social outlier, and has limited sensitivity to, experience with, or knowledge and understanding of how people operate in large groups. Conspiracy theory is the equivalent of dunning kruger failure of personal assessment, projected upon interpersonal and social assessment. In both cases the individual attributes greater ability, agency, and logic to the self and others than they have, because of mistrust, because they do not trust either their own cognition, others, or both. This is why conspiracy theory (systemization) tends to be a male category of cognitive failure, and oppression (personalization) tends to be a female category of cognitive failure. However, we note that in both the Male conspiracy theory and the female oppression cognitive failures, that the parties do not seek to understand the incentives of the individuals they are judging, or to falsify their conspiracy or oppression narratives. There is a reason for it. The human mind operates by building a world model ‘fit for it’s physical, emotional, psychological, and mental budget’. A physiological, emotional, and cognitive economy. This is why people who are ill, depressed, tired, at different points of the day, rested, healthy, excited, or joyous all perceive the same world slighlty differently In both conspiracy and oppression cognitive failures, the individual has defended his or her desperate attempt to suppress the feeling of being out of control of his or her life (due to his or her cognitive limitations), by false self-promise of comprehension. Status is our human accounting system. There are healthy and unhealthy means of suppression emotional panic from cognitive failure to find a means of obtaining success (status) in the social, economic, and political marketplace. Agency (success), Truth / Knowledge / Understanding (acceptance), Philosophy (settlement), Theology-Religion (detachment), Self Discipline (buddhism,stoicism), Ritual/Sport-exercise/hypersocializatin(exposure), Conspiracy and Oppression (withdrawal) narratives are the most common means of providing mindfulness. It’s not hard to see how the consequences of deviation from Knowledge escalate. So, both oppression and conspiracy behaviors are expressions of proto-depression, or prolonged depression from the continuous failure of one’s ideas about one’s self and others and what is in other’s abilities and interests. And That’s because evolution insured that we would remain optimistic to survive in the face of incredible stresses when continued existence is no longer rational. Exhaust all possible explanation for rational choice prior to default to malincentives (conspiracy of intent). In most cases it’s conspiracy of organizational incentives, conspiracy of common interests, conspiracy of genetic bias (such as the ashkenazi adoption of the female strategy), ignorance, error, or stupidity. If you exhaust all of the possible rational incentives then only malincentives remain. But rare. Never attribute to intention what is the product of either incentives, ignorance, or stupidity. Humans by and large justify what they do post hoc with a story. Humans by ad large pursue self interests that they can justify with a story afterward. Because that’s what our brains do. And frankly the more responsibility you have, for the more people, for more risk, the more you have to compromise between different sets of unacceptable externalities that are the cost of getting whatever it s you’re doing done with the resources available, time available, people you have to work with, and incentives you can provide. Most organizational failure that we interpret as conspiracy is the result of people in organizations that are producing malincentives by accident rather than by design. Most groups that engage in evil are doing so because they consider what they’re doing a good. As I’m fond of saying, serial killers justify what they do, and the mothers of serial killers justify what they’ve done, and the fathers of serial killers are happy to throw away the key if not pull the lever. So if it is other than a conspiracy of intention, our problem is not to wish for better humans, but to rule with the humans we have, using the law and incentives to prevent malincentives.

  • Emergent Dualism?

    Apr 25, 2020, 10:01 AM —“So emergent dualism? The brain produces mind as an emergent property?”—Andrew M Gilmour Brain integrates information and produces the consciousness spectrum, that produces mind (use of consciousness by regulating attention through recursive searching by auto-association), that produces logical facility, that produces the reason facility, that produces the language facility, that produces the calculation facility, that produces the computation facility and so on. I can explain consciousness just fine. We only really have understood it for a few years now, but it’s rather obvious at this point. There is a reason you can’t introspect upon how you move your arm and consciousness. Because they’re produced by the same process.

  • Emergent Dualism?

    Apr 25, 2020, 10:01 AM —“So emergent dualism? The brain produces mind as an emergent property?”—Andrew M Gilmour Brain integrates information and produces the consciousness spectrum, that produces mind (use of consciousness by regulating attention through recursive searching by auto-association), that produces logical facility, that produces the reason facility, that produces the language facility, that produces the calculation facility, that produces the computation facility and so on. I can explain consciousness just fine. We only really have understood it for a few years now, but it’s rather obvious at this point. There is a reason you can’t introspect upon how you move your arm and consciousness. Because they’re produced by the same process.

  • Male Female Cognition in Math Is Insightful

    Apr 25, 2020, 10:11 AM MALE FEMALE COGNITION IN MATH IS INSIGHTFUL Very interesting insight into mathematics is that the mathematicians who by far, best explain mathematics as a language are women. While the mathematicians that practice mathematics have a tendency to platonism. This is interesting in that for men the spatial-mathematical world is existential and for women its predominantly verbal. And we see this same differences in gender behavior across the spectrum with women providing empirical insight and men providing theoretical insight. Just as we see in all workplaces women are usually superior at many empirical details and certainty and men are superior at coalescing theoretical innovations and risks. To educate people in ‘what is math’ (a language of positional names) I would interview four specific women. If I wanted to educate people in the language of logic-proper I’d ask one woman. If I wanted to extend mathematics from points to geometric combinatorics (i do) I’d interview the same number of men. Just odd that it’s so obvious when you look at the best people in every field. Same in economics. Elinor Ostrom. Empirical not theoretical. Same in computing. Babbage and his wife. Einstein and his significant other. (My ex-wife Allora and I in biz for that matter.) Fascinating.

  • Male Female Cognition in Math Is Insightful

    Apr 25, 2020, 10:11 AM MALE FEMALE COGNITION IN MATH IS INSIGHTFUL Very interesting insight into mathematics is that the mathematicians who by far, best explain mathematics as a language are women. While the mathematicians that practice mathematics have a tendency to platonism. This is interesting in that for men the spatial-mathematical world is existential and for women its predominantly verbal. And we see this same differences in gender behavior across the spectrum with women providing empirical insight and men providing theoretical insight. Just as we see in all workplaces women are usually superior at many empirical details and certainty and men are superior at coalescing theoretical innovations and risks. To educate people in ‘what is math’ (a language of positional names) I would interview four specific women. If I wanted to educate people in the language of logic-proper I’d ask one woman. If I wanted to extend mathematics from points to geometric combinatorics (i do) I’d interview the same number of men. Just odd that it’s so obvious when you look at the best people in every field. Same in economics. Elinor Ostrom. Empirical not theoretical. Same in computing. Babbage and his wife. Einstein and his significant other. (My ex-wife Allora and I in biz for that matter.) Fascinating.