Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • RT @DegenRolf: Man flu isn’t true: There are no sex differences in common cold d

    RT @DegenRolf: Man flu isn’t true: There are no sex differences in common cold d

    RT @DegenRolf: Man flu isn’t true: There are no sex differences in common cold discomforts. https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/392930 https://t.co/i4TDrfaRRQ


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-03 17:30:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1234894035493572608

  • Feminine brain structure (bias verbal, experiential, in time) vs masculine brain

    Feminine brain structure (bias verbal, experiential, in time) vs masculine brain structure (bias physical, action, over time). Look at male vs female writers in any subject.
    Compare a female tv anchor and male talking head. Then at WRITING and RESEARCH by the right vs the left.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-03 15:02:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1234856557948567553

    Reply addressees: @90_guillem

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1234849815911174155

  • Heaping of Undue Praise: All Left Political Behavior Is Expression of Female Cog

    Heaping of Undue Praise: All Left Political Behavior Is Expression of Female Cognitive Warfare https://propertarianism.com/2020/03/03/heaping-of-undue-praise-all-left-political-behavior-is-expression-of-female-cognitive-warfare/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-03 13:08:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1234828091232575488

  • Heaping of Undue Praise: All Left Political Behavior Is Expression of Female Cognitive Warfare

    HEAPING OF UNDUE PRAISE: ALL LEFT POLITICAL BEHAVIOR IS FEMALE COGNITIVE WARFARE EXPRESSION

    —“Heaping of undue praise, or “Praise Bombing”. Praise (love) bombing is baiting into hazard. The goal is for the target to lower their defenses. Manipulation and Betrayal only work if trust is first established.”– Andrew M Gilmour

    Again, the female strategy: heaping of undue praise is how women encourage children to continue in the face of failure and adversity. That’s the positive. In the negative, it’s heaping undue praise on that which is undeserving of it, in order to undermine that which is deserving of it. in other words, the female intuition applied to the negative. ===

    Ryan Drummond From a mother to her child, it’s a good thing as long as it doesn’t induce narcissism in the child. In the realm of politics, education, the state, or anything that expands beyond the closed family circle, it is absolutely dangerous. Risking narcissism to one child through misguided motherhood is…managable, because it is just one input that doesn’t hold THAT much weight (beyond the family circle). Risking that narcissism penetrating the volksgeist, through the input of organisations or governments seen as powerful, can simply cause the fall of civilisations. Andrew M Gilmour Genuine praise vs fraudulent praise. Andrew Spivak Conservatives do this appeal to vanity too when you try to argue for positions or actions that would actually be effective. “You’re better than that”. Patrick Smyth This is why I would prefer that boys be educated by men rather than women. I anticipate that we could get rid of a lot of the entitlement issues young people tend to have now if people aren’t educated solely by indulgent females.

  • Heaping of Undue Praise: All Left Political Behavior Is Expression of Female Cognitive Warfare

    HEAPING OF UNDUE PRAISE: ALL LEFT POLITICAL BEHAVIOR IS FEMALE COGNITIVE WARFARE EXPRESSION

    —“Heaping of undue praise, or “Praise Bombing”. Praise (love) bombing is baiting into hazard. The goal is for the target to lower their defenses. Manipulation and Betrayal only work if trust is first established.”– Andrew M Gilmour

    Again, the female strategy: heaping of undue praise is how women encourage children to continue in the face of failure and adversity. That’s the positive. In the negative, it’s heaping undue praise on that which is undeserving of it, in order to undermine that which is deserving of it. in other words, the female intuition applied to the negative. ===

    Ryan Drummond From a mother to her child, it’s a good thing as long as it doesn’t induce narcissism in the child. In the realm of politics, education, the state, or anything that expands beyond the closed family circle, it is absolutely dangerous. Risking narcissism to one child through misguided motherhood is…managable, because it is just one input that doesn’t hold THAT much weight (beyond the family circle). Risking that narcissism penetrating the volksgeist, through the input of organisations or governments seen as powerful, can simply cause the fall of civilisations. Andrew M Gilmour Genuine praise vs fraudulent praise. Andrew Spivak Conservatives do this appeal to vanity too when you try to argue for positions or actions that would actually be effective. “You’re better than that”. Patrick Smyth This is why I would prefer that boys be educated by men rather than women. I anticipate that we could get rid of a lot of the entitlement issues young people tend to have now if people aren’t educated solely by indulgent females.

  • Criminality Is Genetic and Dysgenia Is an Institutional Failure

    Criminality Is Genetic and Dysgenia Is an Institutional Failure https://propertarianism.com/2020/03/03/criminality-is-genetic-and-dysgenia-is-an-institutional-failure/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-03 13:06:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1234827500586442752

  • Criminality Is Genetic and Dysgenia Is an Institutional Failure

    CRIMINALITY IS GENETIC AND DYSGENIA IS AN INSTITUTIONAL FAILURE

    —“No. Steven Pinker explained this very well. If parenting had an effect at all, it would turn up in the shared environment. It doesn’t.”—JayMan @JayMan471 —“How do you explain single mothers parenting vastly increasing incarceration and unsocial behaviour.”— tweeter

    1) Mothers do not remarry(control, infantilization) or permit others to parent, fathers do. 2) Single mothers don’t cohabit with grandparents as substitute. 3) Single mothers transfer insecurity to children (instability) 4) Increase in female psychosis under feminism. Tolerance?

    —“None of those things.”—JayMan@JayMan471

    What is it instead? 😉 because those things compensated for class (genetic) differences. Which is what I assume you’re going to say. Add: 5) school environment exacerbates. 6) pharmaceuticals (and drugs) exacerbate. 7) recent evidence (female) social media. 8) increase in under-lower class size. So, one can say: 9) increase in anti social behavior. 10) increase in population with it. 11) increase prosecution of it. Edit: ( 11a. in class sortition bc of colleges, and concentrating dysgenia at the bottom – this one is important. ) or 12) decrease in institutional means of compensating for it, suppressing it, and preventing it with marriage, family, community, norm, tradition, and institution. And we can frame the question: (a) are we more aware of it? (b) is there more of it (decline)? (c) are there more people biasing it (population)? (d) are informal and formal institutions no longer controlling it? (e) environmental factors (as w/ lead) (f) all of the above. I read the same papers everyone else does. the disputes are generally categorized as misinterpretation of the top down correlative and categorical; bottom up constructive and individual; and incentives in the constructive that test both. Unfortunately, full accounting is rare. So, to deal with pinker’s assertion that it’s purely genetic, sure. The question then is whether we are just more aware of it, just prosecute it more, increasing dysgenia, or we are failing to mask it with institutions. ie: My original comment’s suggestion: institutions failing. And again, when Jayman disagrees with me it’s because he jumps to the conclusion that I’m making an argument that I am not. 😉 The argument is: Institutional failure. Because dysgenia at present is caused by institutional failure. All of these causes are institutional failures.

  • Criminality Is Genetic and Dysgenia Is an Institutional Failure

    CRIMINALITY IS GENETIC AND DYSGENIA IS AN INSTITUTIONAL FAILURE

    —“No. Steven Pinker explained this very well. If parenting had an effect at all, it would turn up in the shared environment. It doesn’t.”—JayMan @JayMan471 —“How do you explain single mothers parenting vastly increasing incarceration and unsocial behaviour.”— tweeter

    1) Mothers do not remarry(control, infantilization) or permit others to parent, fathers do. 2) Single mothers don’t cohabit with grandparents as substitute. 3) Single mothers transfer insecurity to children (instability) 4) Increase in female psychosis under feminism. Tolerance?

    —“None of those things.”—JayMan@JayMan471

    What is it instead? 😉 because those things compensated for class (genetic) differences. Which is what I assume you’re going to say. Add: 5) school environment exacerbates. 6) pharmaceuticals (and drugs) exacerbate. 7) recent evidence (female) social media. 8) increase in under-lower class size. So, one can say: 9) increase in anti social behavior. 10) increase in population with it. 11) increase prosecution of it. Edit: ( 11a. in class sortition bc of colleges, and concentrating dysgenia at the bottom – this one is important. ) or 12) decrease in institutional means of compensating for it, suppressing it, and preventing it with marriage, family, community, norm, tradition, and institution. And we can frame the question: (a) are we more aware of it? (b) is there more of it (decline)? (c) are there more people biasing it (population)? (d) are informal and formal institutions no longer controlling it? (e) environmental factors (as w/ lead) (f) all of the above. I read the same papers everyone else does. the disputes are generally categorized as misinterpretation of the top down correlative and categorical; bottom up constructive and individual; and incentives in the constructive that test both. Unfortunately, full accounting is rare. So, to deal with pinker’s assertion that it’s purely genetic, sure. The question then is whether we are just more aware of it, just prosecute it more, increasing dysgenia, or we are failing to mask it with institutions. ie: My original comment’s suggestion: institutions failing. And again, when Jayman disagrees with me it’s because he jumps to the conclusion that I’m making an argument that I am not. 😉 The argument is: Institutional failure. Because dysgenia at present is caused by institutional failure. All of these causes are institutional failures.

  • So, to deal with pinker’s assertion that it’s purely genetic, sure. The question

    So, to deal with pinker’s assertion that it’s purely genetic, sure. The question then is whether we are just more aware of it, just prosecute it more, increasing dysgenia, or we are failing to mask it with institutions.

    ie: My original comment’s suggestion: institutions failing.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-02 16:37:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1234518291487612929

    Reply addressees: @JayMan471 @Mywifesson4

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1234517602921259008


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @JayMan471 @Mywifesson4 I read the same papers everyone else does. the disputes are generally categorized as misinterpretation of the top down correlative and categorical; bottom up constructive and individual; and incentives in the constructive that test both. Unfortunately, full accounting is rare.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1234517602921259008

  • And we can frame the question: (a) are we more aware of it? (b) is there more of

    And we can frame the question:
    (a) are we more aware of it?
    (b) is there more of it (decline)?
    (c) are there more people biasing it (population)?
    (d) are informal and formal institutions no longer controlling it?
    (e) environmental factors (as w/ lead)
    (f) all of the above.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-03-02 16:32:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1234516884848021506

    Reply addressees: @JayMan471 @Mywifesson4

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1234516171904385024


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @JayMan471 @Mywifesson4 So, one can say:
    9) increase in anti social behavior.
    10) increase in population with it.
    11) increase prosecution of it.
    or
    12) decrease in institutional means of compensating for it with family, community, norm, tradition, and institution.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1234516171904385024