(FB 1545053449 Timestamp) Seriously. Humans are the best toys. Ya’ ever tape a cat’s feet? Well, you can do the same to humans with just a few words. More fun to watch. And nobody thinks you’re being mean…. at least, if you act innocent enough… lolz
Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1545053449 Timestamp) Seriously. Humans are the best toys. Ya’ ever tape a cat’s feet? Well, you can do the same to humans with just a few words. More fun to watch. And nobody thinks you’re being mean…. at least, if you act innocent enough… lolz
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544981399 Timestamp) —“What are your thoughts on learned intelligence,cause intelligence? Can we therefore train people to be intelligent(by following certain laws),for example charlie munger has a law of “always arguing the other side better than the opponent”,so did Cicero,and it a nice way of avoiding confirmation bias ,if we create certain rules such as these and train people(like dogs),will we increase their intelligence”— Abhimanyu Karnawat There are three issues here. And I’m going to expand the range of your question from intelligence to intuition to political consequences. The first is that intelligence improves with the ability to use language and ideas to calculate. In other words, if you learn english and science and logica, and mathematics a PEOPLE will get smarter by about a standard deviation or so. But it lifts all people in the culture equally. So it’s not so much that we improve the brain but that we improve the precision of it’s means of calculation by better information. The Second is whether people can produce what we call mindfulness through various trainings (equation, discipline, ritual, practice). The other is whether we know what to train them IN (content). I want to know how to eliminate all falsehood from that training (content) and any externalities (side effects) caused by the method of practice. The third is that Everyone in the world wants to preserve his favorite falsehoods – because they’re culture, class, gender and era dependent. I want to know what is NOT dependent upon those biases. That’s science. Now, I am going to clearly bias myself to naturalism because I’m definitely on the Naturalist (scientific) Nature worshiping (old religions), Pagan(hearth religion) side of the anglo scandinavian and german tradition. I know that. I know that is my bias. The question is whether those biases matter if we get the science right. And I think they don’t. Particularly for hindu since all in all it’s a pretty awesome religion that scaled nicely. In my undrestanding the Japanese resisted religion the longest because they had no reason for it. The chinese and japanese governments were either advocats or forcible imposers of buddhism. There were reasons for doing it and they weren’t good. The west had no need of religion either. It was forced on them , and then coerced upon them. I am slowly gaining an understanding of the spread of religion across india and I think it is the most ‘faithful’ to folk religions. I have only recently come to understand that there is good secular work in indian history – very far back in time. And I have begun studying it a bit. The content is purely empirical and practical and of exceptional quality – equal if not better than the chinese (who are have a problem with loving poetic sounding prose). I think it is terribly easy to rid the world of Abrahamism in all its forms if we have yet another more secular or naturalist reformation of christianity in the west and bring it closer to our ancestral religion of the hearth home and nature. But it is not something easily done. And the world has only one enemy today: the followers of the abrahamic religion and their cult of revolution and conquest.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544981399 Timestamp) —“What are your thoughts on learned intelligence,cause intelligence? Can we therefore train people to be intelligent(by following certain laws),for example charlie munger has a law of “always arguing the other side better than the opponent”,so did Cicero,and it a nice way of avoiding confirmation bias ,if we create certain rules such as these and train people(like dogs),will we increase their intelligence”— Abhimanyu Karnawat There are three issues here. And I’m going to expand the range of your question from intelligence to intuition to political consequences. The first is that intelligence improves with the ability to use language and ideas to calculate. In other words, if you learn english and science and logica, and mathematics a PEOPLE will get smarter by about a standard deviation or so. But it lifts all people in the culture equally. So it’s not so much that we improve the brain but that we improve the precision of it’s means of calculation by better information. The Second is whether people can produce what we call mindfulness through various trainings (equation, discipline, ritual, practice). The other is whether we know what to train them IN (content). I want to know how to eliminate all falsehood from that training (content) and any externalities (side effects) caused by the method of practice. The third is that Everyone in the world wants to preserve his favorite falsehoods – because they’re culture, class, gender and era dependent. I want to know what is NOT dependent upon those biases. That’s science. Now, I am going to clearly bias myself to naturalism because I’m definitely on the Naturalist (scientific) Nature worshiping (old religions), Pagan(hearth religion) side of the anglo scandinavian and german tradition. I know that. I know that is my bias. The question is whether those biases matter if we get the science right. And I think they don’t. Particularly for hindu since all in all it’s a pretty awesome religion that scaled nicely. In my undrestanding the Japanese resisted religion the longest because they had no reason for it. The chinese and japanese governments were either advocats or forcible imposers of buddhism. There were reasons for doing it and they weren’t good. The west had no need of religion either. It was forced on them , and then coerced upon them. I am slowly gaining an understanding of the spread of religion across india and I think it is the most ‘faithful’ to folk religions. I have only recently come to understand that there is good secular work in indian history – very far back in time. And I have begun studying it a bit. The content is purely empirical and practical and of exceptional quality – equal if not better than the chinese (who are have a problem with loving poetic sounding prose). I think it is terribly easy to rid the world of Abrahamism in all its forms if we have yet another more secular or naturalist reformation of christianity in the west and bring it closer to our ancestral religion of the hearth home and nature. But it is not something easily done. And the world has only one enemy today: the followers of the abrahamic religion and their cult of revolution and conquest.
-
Curt Doolittle shared a link.
(FB 1544932085 Timestamp) Wiki Page is Actually OK. Surprisingly. Technically there is no meaning of life, other than increasing the probability of genetic persistence for those within six or fewer generations of you. We say we want to find ‘meaning’ but this is nothing more than a word-association between the (Positive) experience we feel when we understand, and the fact that there is nothing to undrestand about life other than to make the best use of it that we can before we die. So the question isn’t whether there is meaning to life. THere isn’t. At best we can estimate a sort of accounting. The question is whether we can CREATE MEANING with our lives. Experiences, Friends, Family, Generations, Achievements. Leave the world better for having lived in it. We have but one shot at life, and we have only one choice, and that is how we make use of the time within it.
-
Curt Doolittle shared a link.
(FB 1544932085 Timestamp) Wiki Page is Actually OK. Surprisingly. Technically there is no meaning of life, other than increasing the probability of genetic persistence for those within six or fewer generations of you. We say we want to find ‘meaning’ but this is nothing more than a word-association between the (Positive) experience we feel when we understand, and the fact that there is nothing to undrestand about life other than to make the best use of it that we can before we die. So the question isn’t whether there is meaning to life. THere isn’t. At best we can estimate a sort of accounting. The question is whether we can CREATE MEANING with our lives. Experiences, Friends, Family, Generations, Achievements. Leave the world better for having lived in it. We have but one shot at life, and we have only one choice, and that is how we make use of the time within it.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1544928066 Timestamp) ( Keeping with the theme: Fishing for morons is … it’s so easy. Find something a small mind can feel a sense of superiority (or less inferiority) by attacking or defending and leave it in the open like an eel trap. I should invent a name for this game and see if we can catalog the twenty five most effective moron-traps. )
-
Curt Doolittle shared a link.
(FB 1545149832 Timestamp) RATIONAL SELF-MEDICATION Michael E. Darden, Nicholas W. Papageorge NBER Working Paper No. 25371 Issued in December 2018 NBER Program(s):Health Economics We develop a theory of rational self-medication. The idea is that forward-looking individuals, lacking access to better treatment options, attempt to manage the symptoms of mental and physical pain outside of formal medical care. They use substances that relieve symptoms in the short run but that may be harmful in the long run. For example, heavy drinking could alleviate current symptoms of depression but could also exacerbate future depression or lead to alcoholism. Rational self-medication suggests that, when presented with a safer, more effective treatment, individuals will substitute towards it. To investigate, we use forty years of longitudinal data from the Framingham Heart Study and leverage the exogenous introduction of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). We demonstrate an economically meaningful reduction in heavy alcohol consumption for men when SSRIs became available. Additionally, we show that addiction to alcohol inhibits substitution. Our results suggest a role for rational self-medication in understanding the origin of substance abuse. Furthermore, our work suggests that punitive policies targeting substance abuse may backfire, leading to substitution towards even more harmful substances to self-medicate. In contrast, policies promoting medical innovation that provide safer treatment options could obviate the need to self-medicate with dangerous or addictive substances. https://www.nber.org/papers/w25371
-
Curt Doolittle shared a link.
(FB 1545149832 Timestamp) RATIONAL SELF-MEDICATION Michael E. Darden, Nicholas W. Papageorge NBER Working Paper No. 25371 Issued in December 2018 NBER Program(s):Health Economics We develop a theory of rational self-medication. The idea is that forward-looking individuals, lacking access to better treatment options, attempt to manage the symptoms of mental and physical pain outside of formal medical care. They use substances that relieve symptoms in the short run but that may be harmful in the long run. For example, heavy drinking could alleviate current symptoms of depression but could also exacerbate future depression or lead to alcoholism. Rational self-medication suggests that, when presented with a safer, more effective treatment, individuals will substitute towards it. To investigate, we use forty years of longitudinal data from the Framingham Heart Study and leverage the exogenous introduction of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). We demonstrate an economically meaningful reduction in heavy alcohol consumption for men when SSRIs became available. Additionally, we show that addiction to alcohol inhibits substitution. Our results suggest a role for rational self-medication in understanding the origin of substance abuse. Furthermore, our work suggests that punitive policies targeting substance abuse may backfire, leading to substitution towards even more harmful substances to self-medicate. In contrast, policies promoting medical innovation that provide safer treatment options could obviate the need to self-medicate with dangerous or addictive substances. https://www.nber.org/papers/w25371
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1545229595 Timestamp) THE DRIVE OF MEN TO ACT VS TO DREAM AND CHIT CHAT Of self interest, opportunity to profit, and material change, it is very unlikely that ‘spiritual’ anything will drive men as much. We know this from all of history. Spirit makes men chatter. Opportunity makes men war. We go to war for opportunity. We stay at war because we love it, and we stay in formation because we love the men next to us.