Curt Doolittle

Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • TOURNAMENT, PAIR BONDING, CAPITAL, POLITICAL ORDER, POLICY —“What are your tho

    TOURNAMENT, PAIR BONDING, CAPITAL, POLITICAL ORDER, POLICY

    —“What are your thoughts in this case and specifically how it relates to tournament species v. pair bonding species. When society has comfortable stores and capital, where does that leave the pair bonded class compared to the tournament class of human. Considering both male and female it would be common to see the tournament class dominate every time. How does the pair bonded male compete and in socialist arena where the female is taken care of by the greater part of society? Is the socialist economical model naturally doomed by progress of the human condition to become a communal type and deficit living situation?”—Craig Michael

    1. Restore political reciprocity (eliminate redistributions).
    2. Restore voluntary disassociation and association.
    3. Eliminate interest on consumer credit.
    4. Restore the Militia, Regiment and Barracks system (soak up men) and the WPA so we have defense, emergency, and commons production programs for single males.
    5. Enact singapore retirement that is non-attachable or transferrable.
    6. Convert legal marriage to an exchange of limited powers of attorney, and private contract.(what it legally exists as)
    7. Restore the legal definition of ‘marriage’ to a publicly subsidized corporation for the intergeneration production of children.(which is what it exists as)
    8. Restore fault divorce, and restitution for interference in a marriage (make cheating extremely expensive).
    9. Eliminate Alimony, Support, Common property. (restore male contributory portability)
    10. Restore the primacy of policy to family rather than individual.
    11. Eliminate the marriage penalty and maintain the individual penalty (increased taxes on unmarried childless).

    You cannot fix the natural differences between males and females but you can stop the damage we have done to the production of the institution of marriage as a corporation for reproduction production insurance and care.

    TOURNAMENT SPECIES.
    –“Tournament species in zoology are those species in which members of one sex (usually males) compete in order to mate. In tournament species, the reproductive success of the small group of competition winners is predominantly higher than that of the large group of losers.”—

    PAIR BONDING SPECIES
    —“In biology, a pair bond is the strong affinity that develops in some species between a pair consisting of a male and female, or in some cases as a same-sex pairing, potentially leading to producing offspring and/or a lifelong bond.”—

    DISTRIBUTION
    —“Humans are a hybrid between the two, and different individuals fall into different places on the spectrum of pair-bonding vs. tournament. And, tournament women will pretend to be pair bonding to increase their reproductive success, and pair-bonding trending men will adapt themselves to be more tournament-oriented (TheRedPill/Pickup Game is basically all of these).—Anon

    Source date (UTC): 2019-07-12 02:46:05 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102426185858126992

  • (… continued) So you do not know what and why you feel the way you do. You onl

    (… continued)

    So you do not know what and why you feel the way you do. You only sense it is a good. The libertarian does not know why he feels the way he does, he only senses it is good. The conservative does not know why he feels the way he does, only that he senses it is good.

    However, in the long run the conservative is the only one making use of all available knowledge over the long run.

    Everything liberals thought would be true in their pseudoscientific rage against the darwinian machine has been false.

    Man was no oppressed. Semi domesticated human animals like all other animals we domesticated, have been eugenically governed in eastern and western civilization – largely through climate, competitors, and manorialism to produce society with superior distributions. ANd your ‘privilege’ of hyperconsumption and violation of the many compromises between the generations, genders, classes, and masculine-feminine minds, was made and still is made, possible by those who domesticated your ancestors – and apparently failed to domesticate your line.

    What do we do? We are sufficiently wealthy to separate and go our own ways, and return to our process of speciation.

    You may pursue your dysgenic goals, and we will pursue our eugenic goals, and we will rapidly see what occurs to a ‘liberal, feminine, redistributionist, equalitarian’ order without the libertarians and conservatives striving at all times to preserve what they and their ancestors have made, while you do nothing but continue to overpopulate a planet, drive down the averages, and reduce you and yours to yet another failed effeminate equalitarian utopia.

    You will not however take us down with you. (We would rather …. revolt and end you.)

    We will continue to rebuild our society from the catastrophe of century of pseudoscience (marx, freud, adorno, cantor, derrida, chomsky et al) and their marxism, postmodernism, neoliberalism, feminism, and denialism – and we will continue to build ours on the centuries of western tradition (aristotle, hume, darwin, menger, and the common law of reciprocity.

    So that is what noah and I are talking about. Him about finding happiness in the present, and I about how to solve the political problem of your feminine dysgenic animal desire to reverse our evolutionary progress and turn us to state of animals, ignorance, and poverty.

    So no it is not an act of GSRRM to state what I have stated. It is a scientific description of the cognitive processes and their dysgenic (herd) outcomes that you seek to implement despite knowing very little, thinking very little, and feeling only what an animal feels.

    Women feel as they do for the simple reason that at maturity their nervous system develops into a shared one so that they are willing to bear any cost to preserve a costly offspring regardless of merit.

    (continued…)

    Source date (UTC): 2019-07-12 00:10:18 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102425573316009260

    Replying to: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102425569468533065

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtd

    HE ANTI-LIBERAL ARGUMENT (fresh weaponry for your use) Do you know the difference between virtue, rule, and outcome ethics? What about the difference between moral, normative, and outcome law? What is the difference between your line of argument(Empathy, Care Taking), Noah Revoy’s line of argument(Psychology, Success), and my line of argument(Law, Limits)? What is the genetic, institutional, traditional, normative, and psychological outcome of those three lines of argument? We demonstrate approximately six general moral rules (foundations) over the use of capital-in-toto. We demonstrate a bias between specializing in them: consumption (caretaking, proportionality) and dysgenia, production (opportunity, reciprocity) and eugenia, and preservation( disgust/purity, loyalty) and eugenia, while only the preservationists practicing all six equally, the productionists dropping loyalty, and the consumptionism dropping all but care and proportionality. These six moral rules roughly are divisible into private and common capital demands in exchange for our cooperation. These capital demands and moral demands roughly correspond to the feminine, ascendent male, and established male distributions. The structure of the human brain both physical, developmental, hormonal, and neurochemical corresponds to about the same distribution between female, beta male, and dominant male. The distribution of mental illness psychotic < solipsistic to < feminine < to > masculine > to autistic > anti-social reflects these brain structures and distributions. These developments appear to follow the general rule of 80% genetic and 20% something else (variation in developmental progress). (continued…)

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102425569468533065

  • THE FLYNN EFFECT The flynn effect, as far as I know (a) has reversed, and was ca

    THE FLYNN EFFECT

    The flynn effect, as far as I know (a) has reversed, and was caused by (b) reduction of developmental harms at the bottom, (c) normalization of the scientific (general rule) framework and elimination of the specific-rule framework thru education, (d) availability of abortion in the lower classes.

    All groups raise by the same levels.
    All groups vary by rates of reproduction between classes.
    All early gains are moderated by age seventeen.
    All differences return to genetic norms in the family by adulthood.

    The primary differences between groups are
    – rates and depths of maturity vs neoteny
    – sizes of the genetic classes (rates of learning)
    – genetic agency (frontal lobe) development
    – genetic linguistic ability (verbal intelligence)

    All IQ’s worldwide peak in poor backward countries then reverse worldwide as they are currently reversing most in scandinavian countries with previously largest middle class distributions due to manorialism.

    It’s not complicated.

    Lying about it is.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 23:53:05 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102425505636361029

  • Again we have known about this phenomenon for decades and it’s an artifact of me

    Again we have known about this phenomenon for decades and it’s an artifact of memory.

    —“One instance of this sort of simple manifestation (I visualize the item, feel the emotions I associate with that item, wistfully muse “I wish I had a ____” and Shazam! The item appears out of nowhere) would be mere coincidence. “—

    Or it’s that some set of columns has stumbled upon a prediction alerts your thalamus enough to excite a few neurons in your frontal lobes, and you feel the impulse to visualize that which you have already predicted. (This happens all the time.)

    The smarter you are the more it happens. The more you spend in the free association “zone” the more frequently it happens.

    —“yet must also admit there is more going on”—

    That is different from claiming a thing, testifying to a thing, depending upon such a thing, or asking others to depend upon a thing, or even suggesting that they might depend upon a thing – even if such a thing is true.

    I have worked on this problem quite a bit and as far as I can tell, and as far as any ‘magician’ and ‘debuker’ can tell, it’s all suggestion. The best way to test yourself on these ‘metaphysical’ question sis to learn the art of suggestion.

    My favorite example is a woman who ‘feels’ something is wrong on the bust but doesn’t realize it’s the breathing of people behind her that is cueing her.

    The most common is subjectivity to the same information produces synchronicity without communication.

    So that means I can’t find a reason to think it’s other than synchronicity and suggestion by exposure to information.

    Doesn’t mean I don’t feel the same thing sometimes.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:44:56 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424765784835464

    Replying to: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424764699895143

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtd

    ( …. continued:) So given that reason and then science evolved from law, and law dependent upon testimony, and that we are seeking to produce in the science that degree of testimony we would produce in court, then I see nothing terribly novel about continuing and completing that evolutionary process. In other words, science adopted operational prose as a means of suppressing the untestifiable. And I can see no reason why we would not extend this from the sciences to the pseudosciences – especially those which are used to construct and enforce law. —“The reason I care at all about this metaphysics issue is because I must partially disagree with the last line in the 18MAR2018 statement. While the list Curt provides is a good start, it is just a start, just a tip, and I suspect there is a whole lot more as yet unseen and undescribed to that iceberg. “— Despite trying, and the efforts of tens of thousands of researchers we cannot find a single case that is inexplicable by naturalistic means. In other words, I can’t find a reason to put money on (demonstrated belief in) other than common cognitive artifacts. —“That course was SOM 212: Myth & Spirit – The Life of Joseph Campbell”— My argument is that if metaphysics refers to what exists, then what do we name the study of the imaginary and fictional. In other words, how do we disambiguate between the operational, and the non? That does not mean that we do not find solace, escape, entertainment, ideation, or wisdom in fictional worlds. it does mean that we cannot testify to them or use them in argument (truth testing, evidence, persuasion, law). —“I have observed many, many, demonstrations of this effect which go far beyond pop psych positive thinking, social group effect, and anything else reasonably explicable by conventional Newtonian understanding of a mechanistic universe. “— As far as I know we have understood this phenomenon since the late seventies as nothing more than synchronicity when subject to the same information. We cannot find a single case otherwise. —“Rather, an example of this metaphysical (meaning, we just do not yet know how the black box of the universe does it) effect would be my thinking about a certain extremely unusual item, which I have not seen for many years, while in a fuge state washing dishes in the evening, then the next day driving down the road find that this exact item has literally fallen out of the sky and is laying there on the center line of a deserted stretch of road right in front of me (fell off a truck, presumably).”— (continued….)

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424764699895143

  • Normal people are not capable of calculus, economics, programming, law, or forma

    Normal people are not capable of calculus, economics, programming, law, or formal logic. They are merely the BENEFICIARIES of it when used by those of us who can.

    Understanding is not necessary for benefit. Availability of the courts to punish and market to reward, eliminate the need for the majority to understand.

    We must restore our courts to the suppression of falsehood rather than the defense of the suppression truth, and the offensive use of falsehood against our people by abrahamic prose in its sophistic, pseudoscientific, and supernatural forms.

    (repost)

    Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:33:31 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424720892278212

  • MALES GSRRM – BUT FOR DIFFERENT REASONS. by Bill Joslin Males GSRRM but for diff

    MALES GSRRM – BUT FOR DIFFERENT REASONS.
    by Bill Joslin

    Males GSRRM but for different reasons. All day long I work with guys that are verbally jabbing each other. It twofold – risk management (keep your shit together, do it right – this is the content) coupled with ‘if you fuck up, you’ll be the butt if jokes for the rest of the day or until someone else fucks up – humour is the context. Humour is the context because it encourages honesty).

    The two together equates to “if you f-up it’s okay tell us we’ll fix it, but also, it’s not okay to f-up)

    It’s risk management opposed to truth suppression, disapproval instead of argument, dominance and power plays.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:31:55 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424714616200800

  • MANAGING FUTURE DYSGENIA Last century <85 was dead weight. Right now <95 is dead

    MANAGING FUTURE DYSGENIA

    Last century <85 was dead weight. Right now <95 is dead weight. In the future < 105 will be dead weight. [1]

    One child policy is enough.

    [1] these are absolute measures, at current standing, not normative, where 105 is the desired minimum median of the distribution, established by the ability to learn from instructions rather than imitation.

    This means we will move from 15-30-50% if we are not careful, and then we will end up like south america or the middle east….

    —“Aren’t there ways to make them not dead weight? Mediating structures?”—Moritz Bierling

    Multiple economies with multiple currencies, where those who cannot serve consumption market ends can work to serve commons (aesthetic) ends. In other words, the market for voluntary organization of production and a non-market of involuntary organization of production (how unions operate today).

    In other words, absorb a lot of labor making the commons the worlds greatest garden of eden, including restoration of the use of hand-build construction techniques that have millennia long durability rather than current nonsense.

    There is a particular problem in economics under which one currency drives up all prices and wages. This isn’t necessary.
    There is a similar problem in the theoretical basis of most digital currencies….

    Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:23:09 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424680124160661

  • WE DON’T USE THE TERM “FREE WILL” We don’t really use the term ‘Free Will’, beca

    WE DON’T USE THE TERM “FREE WILL”

    We don’t really use the term ‘Free Will’, because it is an ideal, and so tainted that it’s meaningless.

    Instead, we use the terms…
    1. Agency (via positiva) and;
    2. Sovereignty (via negativa) and;
    3. Reciprocity (via voluntary, productive);
    …and we state operationally what those mean.

    If you cant disambiguate it and operationalize it then you don’t understand it.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:22:39 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424678176895590

  • “Genuine question…If men don’t like to be criticized, etc by their women (GRSS

    —“Genuine question…If men don’t like to be criticized, etc by their women (GRSSM), how do women let them know they’re slipping and need to step up? Or is this left to the men’s circle and considered a man’s job to keep himself in check (so to speak)?”— ‎Michelle German

    It’s fine if its not argument. GSRRM = disapproval. argument = true/false, reciprocal/not. you can disapprove of behavior, but not truth.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:21:38 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424674220334270

  • COURSE UPDATE: struggling to get the nervous system videos done but they are awe

    COURSE UPDATE: struggling to get the nervous system videos done but they are awesome. I keep trying to keep it simple. We’ll see. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2019-07-11 20:13:07 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/102424640723796827