Curt Doolittle

Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • NOTHING BEATS THE ROI FROM RAISING YOUR OWN CHILDREN. by Noah J Revoy My working

    NOTHING BEATS THE ROI FROM RAISING YOUR OWN CHILDREN.

    by Noah J Revoy

    My working theory is that most human development is the direct result of improvements in the sexual market and parenting.

    More eugenic reproductive choices leads to stronger families -> better parents -> healthier children -> higher Agency adults and on aggregate a more sovereign polity.

    The people who best manage their reproduction dominate a given system because the production of high IQ, high Agency people is humanities most profitable endeavour.

    NOTHING beats the ROI from raising your own children.

    This is why I focus on helping our people improve their SMV and learn Agency. It’s where I can make my strongest contribution.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-23 08:43:00 UTC

  • Counter-intuitive, radical, unpredictable events are more influential than the f

    Counter-intuitive, radical, unpredictable events are more influential than the foreseeable. What you don’t know and don’t predict is what will harm you. Whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger. Seek Stresses for fitness (survival). And it’s Elegant, Rare, and Beautiful. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-23 01:19:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186814445378510848

    Reply addressees: @QuestionMThings

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186811337630011392

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186811337630011392

  • WHY DO CHILDREN GO WITH THE MOTHER GIVEN THE DATA? —-“immature children are th

    WHY DO CHILDREN GO WITH THE MOTHER GIVEN THE DATA?

    —-“immature children are the responsibility of the mother in the event of a divorce.” What is the empirical basis for this? Is there a scientific literature showing that when post-breastfeeding prepubescent children are made ward of their fathers, rather than their mothers, they have developmental failures?”—Asab Karpuz

    ^No. It’s just the evidence from every law code throughout history, that whenever there is a divorce the mother is returned to her father with her children and those assets the father contributed to the marriage.”

    Traditionally men take charge of boys during a ritual of some sort (coming of age) where they leave the mother gradually or rapidly and join the world of men. Girls are not treated the same because there is endless demand for them, whether helping mother and siblings, or for sex and fertility, or for assistance in the operation of a household whether single or multi-generational.

    The evidence is somewhat the opposite in that single women are deleterious to the development of their children, mostly because they will not accept a male who has influence over her children, where as the opposite is true in that men quickly reform stable households.

    So (a) is the mother emotionally stable and not exposing her children to psychological chaos (b) is she sufficiently conscientious to run a household and govern children (c) is she financially stable in and possessed of enough income to run a household, and (d) is she stable enough to restore a two-parent family.

    Conversely is the man (a) not anti-social, abusive, addictive, or criminal (c) desirable enough and conscientious enough to attract a woman who can maintain a household, (c) capable of producing sufficient income to afford doing so. In other words, it simply more beneficial to hold a two parent household and men are more likely to rapidly construct one.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-22 14:42:00 UTC

  • (Women at the next table discussing reading women authors in particular Alcott a

    (Women at the next table discussing reading women authors in particular Alcott and Austen, with interjections complaining abut housework, how other people don’t serve their interests as much as they think they serve others’ interests; how other women think foolishly or have selfish intent -without realizing the natural contradiction in the conversation; and the evil of men in between. All stereotypes are true.”)

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-22 11:41:00 UTC

  • Breakfast yesterday morning. Six women. A candidate’s appearance definitely infl

    Breakfast yesterday morning. Six women. A candidate’s appearance definitely influences their opinion. It’s … this has gotta stop. Really. Seriously.

    Now we can reverse it, or give them their own ‘house’ of commons so to speak. And restore the multiple houses of the classes.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-22 00:59:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186447026260774913

    Reply addressees: @StefanMolyneux

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186296323412299776

    IN REPLY TO:

    @StefanMolyneux

    Ladies.

    Justin Trudeau will NOT date you if you vote for him.

    But he WILL tax the hell out of the man who will marry you.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186296323412299776

  • Laurelle asked: —“Why does Cane find it necessary, in a 2009 publication, to i

    Laurelle asked: —“Why does Cane find it necessary, in a 2009 publication, to include an essay (within the chapter on J.D. Salinger) titled, “How to create female characters that readers… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=489735368290025&id=100017606988153

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-21 19:52:24 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186369666379210752

  • WRITING CHARACTERS: SORRY BUT YES, FEMALES AND MALES SPEAK (VERY) DIFFERENTLY. A

    WRITING CHARACTERS: SORRY BUT YES, FEMALES AND MALES SPEAK (VERY) DIFFERENTLY.

    And we speak differently whether or not members of the opposite sex are the the room or hearing distance. Both are more reserved in the presence of the opposite sex.

    So when writing characters, don’t force the audience out of suspension of disbelief.

    Laurelle asked: —“Why does Cane find it necessary, in a 2009 publication, to include an essay (within the chapter on J.D. Salinger) titled, “How to create female characters that readers remember?” I mean, really.’—

    Because men are as notoriously bad at creating female characters, as women are at creating men. Dialog that is counter to type (falling out of character) is one of the most common failings of authors, with misgendered speech the most common means of creating cardboard characters. Sensitivity tends to vary between male and female cognition with empathizing minds (dominantly female) tolerating it (not breaking suspension of disbelief), and systematizing minds (dominantly male) not tolerating it (breaking suspension of disbelief). In fact, it’s rather humorous that you even mention this because you’re demonstrating it. The most common demonstrably female cognitive bias is NAXALT (“not all x are like that”) meaning failure to grasp a distribution.

    Now all of us vary in our distribution of systematizing(autistic extreme) male bias and empathizing (psychotic extreme) female bias and we find masculinely biased females and femininely biased males. But that doesn’t change the fact that while some of us are insensitive (empathic) to patterns of behavior and some of us are extremely sensitive to behavioral patterns (systematizing), that the audience’s (marketplace’s) tolerance (willingness to keep investing time in the author’s work) is unaffected by one’s ability to construct a believable character that meets the target market’s demand for suspension of disbelief.

    Same is for age, same is for occupation, same is for socio-economic class. Same is for time period.

    BTW: Stereotypes are the most accurate measurement in the social sciences, for obvious reasons: they’re continually tested empirically every day. Analytic males have the most accurate judgement of groups (patterns of action), and slightly sensitive females have the most accurate judgement of individuals (patterns of empathy(feeling)). This measure averages out at somewhere between .2 and .5. So it isn’t an extreme advantage or disadvantage. But it does matter. ie: If you write a romance novel it doesn’t matter as much as if you write a spy thriller.

    Hope this is useful for other writers.

    Cheers.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-21 15:52:00 UTC

  • THE ZONE REQUIRES FREE ASSOCIATION WITHOUT EXTERNAL “INFECTION” —“A man of imm

    THE ZONE REQUIRES FREE ASSOCIATION WITHOUT EXTERNAL “INFECTION”

    —“A man of immense creativity and endless ideas, Balzac was yet a creature of habit; indeed, a fixed routine was a large part of his success. He isolated himself from the world so that he could concentrate on his writing. He did this in two ways: first, by staying in his home with the blinds drawn,§- and second, by working at night while the world slept. Unless you distance yourself from the ceaseless distractions of the everyday world, like most successful writers (Conrad locked himself into a room, Salinger wrote in a concrete bunker, Fleming completed all the Bond novels in a Jamaican hideaway), unless you take steps to isolate yourself from the madding crowd, distractions are liable to make sustained work impossible. But perhaps even more than isolation, Balzac’s secret was coffee. His procedure was to keep himself alert during the wee hours of the night with murderously black and concentrated and above all thick-brewed coffee, which he made in a big coffeepot and sipped while he worked. He was so fond of coffee that he devoted a chapter to it in a scientific treatise on modern stimulants, singing its praises in glowing terms “[C]offee is a great power in my life,” he confessed. “I have observed its effects on an epic scale.” It kept him awake at night and enabled him to write. It stimulated his creative powers. It allowed him to marshal his thoughts. It gave him so many ideas he could barely keep up with them and his fingers flew across the pages, writing novel after novel at breakneck speed.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-21 15:32:00 UTC

  • Most right wingers focus on self improvement but most military action is a funct

    Most right wingers focus on self improvement but most military action is a function of teamwork not individual achievement. Your primary weapon is physical fitness. Eighty percent of weapon effectiveness is learned in the first few weeks. That’s why riflement defeated professional warriors ending the feudal era.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-21 10:05:00 UTC

  • Did you know that about a third of women have some form of mental illness? That

    Did you know that about a third of women have some form of mental illness? That the spectrum of female to male brain structure is psychotic to autistic? That hyper solipsistic empathising is borderline psychotic? And that moralising doesn’t scale or account for costs?

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-20 14:20:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185923825235562506

    Reply addressees: @LadyAodh

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185922461373812739

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185922461373812739