Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • I thought of him too. At one time it certainly was true. Dali Lama for certain.

    I thought of him too. At one time it certainly was true. Dali Lama for certain. Possibly Sowell, VDH, Putin. But very hard to use ‘wise’ today: “Thorough comprehension of the history and present context of the human condition.” Pretty sure I know the best minds, and none ‘wise’.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 02:15:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187915738360795136

    Reply addressees: @Edificerexan @Cernovich

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187876363719581696


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Edificerexan

    @Cernovich Henry kissinger?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187876363719581696

  • Hard to argue with TS and VDH as candidates. It is very hard to use the term ‘wi

    Hard to argue with TS and VDH as candidates.
    It is very hard to use the term ‘wise’ in an age of rapid transition of demographic, social, political, and international relations on a scale not seen since the end of the world war, or perhaps even the enlightenment or 30yrs War.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-26 02:05:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187913020426608640

    Reply addressees: @agentkilmer @Cernovich

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187889027036241921


    IN REPLY TO:

    @agentkilmer

    @Cernovich Thomas Sowell, Shelby Steele, Victor Davis Hanson, Mark Levin, & David Horowitz

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187889027036241921

  • It’s better to think of them as people who don’t care one way or the other. They

    It’s better to think of them as people who don’t care one way or the other. They are comfortable, and they just want to get along.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-25 19:18:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187810663428702210

    Reply addressees: @ClownBa73413423

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187810101085818880


    IN REPLY TO:

    @FullAccountant

    @curtdoolittle Are centrists essentially people who have a half feminine brain and half masculine brain? Peterson comes to mind.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187810101085818880

  • “The crazy notion that overlapping distributions can still have divergent centra

    —“The crazy notion that overlapping distributions can still have divergent central tendencies and dispersion. It’s almost as if statistical reasoning doesn’t stop at the door just because we want it to.”—Duke Newcomb


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-25 17:32:00 UTC

  • THE PAST CHALLENGE OF BRINGING WOMEN INTO, AND KEEPING THEM IN, PROPERTARIANISM

    THE PAST CHALLENGE OF BRINGING WOMEN INTO, AND KEEPING THEM IN, PROPERTARIANISM

    —“Enjoying your posts”— A very kind woman 😉

    Awesome.

    It’s very hard for us to keep women interested, so that makes me (and the leadership) very happy.

    Three reasons it’s challenging: (I need a reason to post this so I’ll seize the opportunity you’ve created.   )

    The general strategy of restoring the compromise between the genders that makes raising children, family, civil society, harmonious society, possible tends to attract men falsifying the excesses of marxism, feminism, postmodernism, and denialism (political correctness) when masculine men always and everywhere think in systems and politics, and women in empathy and relationships means that if we don’t find women who’ve had strong fathers and brothers, that they too often cannot translate male systematizing and political speech(aggregates), and interpret it as personal speech, or and interpersonal speech and find this offensive.

    Worse, we can attract men with bad experiences making it worse. SO this is why I spend time writing about male and female relationships in economic terms so that we can return to a compromise between the genders rather than a see-saw of conflcit between extremes.

    Worse, I teach in the masculine method of competition using king of the hill games, taking positions i agree with, disagree with, or can go other way with, or which can be interpreted by me advocating both ways. This generates lots of masculine huffing and chuffing and flexing and dominance, which is how men love to learn and will value what they learn. And very few women like to play the king of the hill game. Most women tend to referee the men instead. And that’s probably our natural dispositions.,

    So a woman has to be able to say ‘thats just silly man talk’ the same way men say ‘thats just silly women talk’ because we’re both expressing our genetic impulses instead of working on compromise through trades. The difference is that is almost universal for masculine men to say ‘men and women engage in silly man talk, and silly women talk and that’s ok’. And for evolutionary reasons – men fear only of force not words, and women primarily concerned with words, both for their own protection from other women, and for protection of their children on many levels – including preventing them from ‘learning what they can’t yet make use of’.

    I think part of our transition out of the more analytic content and more into the religious, social, and political application of p-law is helping our expansion. Very few people want to understand testimonial truth – and I’m not sure how many can. lol )


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-25 16:01:00 UTC

  • THE MOST IMPORTANT LESSON FROM THE CHURCH EXPERIENCE The most important lesson I

    THE MOST IMPORTANT LESSON FROM THE CHURCH EXPERIENCE

    The most important lesson I’ve observed, and perhaps the most important, is that sitting still in church, and the social pressure of sitting still in church, no matter how hard it is, teaches us the meaning of ‘sacred’ which is ‘we have no rights of self fulfillment’.

    I think it is underrated, how much the respect we demonstrate for one another in religious ceremony translates to how we ALWAYS act in the commons – and I think the loss of this ‘sacredness’ and this training in the ‘submission’ by develops ‘agency’ over impulses such that we do not impose so many costs of self expression (hyper-consumption) on the commons and therefore the polity.

    You do know what group did this right? What one group undermined it? I do.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-25 10:02:00 UTC

  • TRUTH ABOUT HUMAN BEINGS People are rational actors acting in their rational sel

    TRUTH ABOUT HUMAN BEINGS

    People are rational actors acting in their rational self interests, that observe the minimum conformance to rule, procedure, norm, tradition, regulation,… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=492129601383935&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-25 00:20:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187524407104811008

  • TRUTH ABOUT HUMAN BEINGS People are rational actors acting in their rational sel

    TRUTH ABOUT HUMAN BEINGS

    People are rational actors acting in their rational self interests, that observe the minimum conformance to rule, procedure, norm, tradition, regulation, legislation, and law, necessary to preserve their status in the social order. Period. End of Story. Good luck falsifying it.

    People are not good, ethical, or moral. They are amoral. They discover what is in their self interest within the environmental limits and congratulate themselves for the content of their character (self image).

    This is the empirical evidence from all people in all cultures, in all countries, in all civilizations, across all of history.

    The civilization of man was performed by the incremental provision of incentives to find self congratulation in minimum accomodation of the various systems of rules, by the incremental evolution of law, norm, and custom to suppress as many opportunities for bad, unethical, immoral, conduct as affordable by the polity, and where incentives are possible to construct. Hence the necessity of sheriffs and policemen and populations increased in anonymity.

    We must govern amoral humans because all are amoral.

    Ergo we must govern pessimistically so that we continuously evolve the suppression of irreciprocity (the bad, unethical, immoral) as quickly as we evolve new methods of bad, unethical and immoral behavior.

    Optimism is why progressive governments fail.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 20:20:00 UTC

  • Teaching is a talent, with a tiny bit of craftsmanship. You can’t teach a talent

    Teaching is a talent, with a tiny bit of craftsmanship. You can’t teach a talent. You’ve got the talent or you don’t. Too many don’t.

    Teaching consists almost entirely of the Grammars (means… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=491881388075423&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 16:01:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187398705927856134

  • Training, Intuition, bias, and predisposition are two different things, yet most

    Training, Intuition, bias, and predisposition are two different things, yet most of the gender-neutral literature measures the results of training not disposition, impulse, and bias.

    Why? Measurements evolved for measurement of men.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-24 15:17:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1187387544234803206