Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1545588824 Timestamp) THE PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGY AND GENETICS OF LEFTISM by Rosenborg Predmetsky Cultural Marxists are all structural and no agency (perhaps a good propertarian description of “all talk and no walk”). I find it very telling that the advocates of structuralism and post-structuralism tended to be utterly degenerate and depraved idiots — the most obvious examples are Michel Foucault and Jacques Lacan. Both purely r-selected and also totally obsessed with the idea that humans in general lack agency and that human subjectivity is nothing but a function of some antecedent (linguistic or social) structure. They are projecting their own constitutional, biological lack of agency onto humanity at large. When a post-structuralist says “humans lack agency,” I say “speak for yourself, hypo-frontal-cortical wojack!” I see cultural Marxists as high openness to experience with its attendant divergent thinking + dopaminergic sensation seeking + Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS, intense negative effect), and so they are driven by their passions like a kite in a hurricane, lacking anything like authentic agency, and they just project their own pathology onto the rest of humanity. Sensation seeking + intense negative affect + high verbal IQ = quasi-bonobo degenerate reader of Derrida / Foucault. Hyper-feminine, articulate but garrulous, schizophrenia-spectrum, borderline personality with unstable sense of self (which they project onto others), borderline psychotic, highly diffuse and chaotic thought patterns, histrionic, a desire to be seen and desired rather than a desire to create and/or conquer through brilliance or authentic power wrought of discipline.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1545588824 Timestamp) THE PSYCHOLOGY, BIOLOGY AND GENETICS OF LEFTISM by Rosenborg Predmetsky Cultural Marxists are all structural and no agency (perhaps a good propertarian description of “all talk and no walk”). I find it very telling that the advocates of structuralism and post-structuralism tended to be utterly degenerate and depraved idiots — the most obvious examples are Michel Foucault and Jacques Lacan. Both purely r-selected and also totally obsessed with the idea that humans in general lack agency and that human subjectivity is nothing but a function of some antecedent (linguistic or social) structure. They are projecting their own constitutional, biological lack of agency onto humanity at large. When a post-structuralist says “humans lack agency,” I say “speak for yourself, hypo-frontal-cortical wojack!” I see cultural Marxists as high openness to experience with its attendant divergent thinking + dopaminergic sensation seeking + Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS, intense negative effect), and so they are driven by their passions like a kite in a hurricane, lacking anything like authentic agency, and they just project their own pathology onto the rest of humanity. Sensation seeking + intense negative affect + high verbal IQ = quasi-bonobo degenerate reader of Derrida / Foucault. Hyper-feminine, articulate but garrulous, schizophrenia-spectrum, borderline personality with unstable sense of self (which they project onto others), borderline psychotic, highly diffuse and chaotic thought patterns, histrionic, a desire to be seen and desired rather than a desire to create and/or conquer through brilliance or authentic power wrought of discipline.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546015145 Timestamp) —“What spectrum?”— |SPECTRUM| Psychosis <- Solipsism <- sensitive <- Feminine <-> Masculine -> analytic -> Aspie -> Autism Female Psychosis <– to –> Male Autism Spectrum. Now, produce a vertical axis that is from prosocial at the top to antisocial at the bottom. Then use dominance submission on the z axis. That gives you a pretty good graph of how people think.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546014923 Timestamp) —“Are there some factors that contribute to bad genes ?”— Ugly asymmetric, disproportionate, people, with low neoteny, low gender dimorphism, with low intelligence, and anti-social personality disorders -vs- Beautiful symmetrical and proportional people, with high neoteny, high gender dimorphism, with high intelligence, and pro-sociality.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546009084 Timestamp) YOU DON”T THINK OF IT BUT… Delayed marriage and reproduction not only decrease infant mortality, increase investment in children, but they force CLASS SORTITION by demonstrated evidence of success. This is the ‘big sort’ that is going on. Except we are not compensating by reducing the reproduction of the underclasses and upwardly redistributing reproduction to their betters. THIS STUFF MATTERS.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1545943056 Timestamp) RE: Nassim Nicholas Taleb ON HIS IQ RANT I will still take this debate, but not interwoven with twitter-spam. (a) g measures what we attempt to measure (b) chance of success corresponds to a distribution of traits, plus the utility of those traits, in service of the population under the bell curve within 1 SD. Those of us with exceptional abilities favor working with our region of the bell curve – puzzles – that are of INDIRECT value rather than DIRECT value. WE HAVE KNOWN THIS FOR DECADES. Lastly, we go to university etc to avoid the marketplace (‘work’). This is the value of higher education: to provide a non-market means of identifying selection. In this sense your criticism is correct. In the sense that you’re criticizing IQ measurements, you’re WRONG …PERIOD. All of this is OLD NEWS. If you want to encourage people to prosper by pairing their skills to those necessary to serve the market that they understand, then yes. If you mean very bright people are fooled by sophism, innumeracy, pseudoscience – then yes. But likewise, just as it has taken you many years to migrate from the positivist search for mathematical discovery of units of informational prediction, to the demand for warranty of due diligence (falsification), you too are vulnerable to innumeracy, pseudoscience, ‘literature’.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546015145 Timestamp) —“What spectrum?”— |SPECTRUM| Psychosis <- Solipsism <- sensitive <- Feminine <-> Masculine -> analytic -> Aspie -> Autism Female Psychosis <– to –> Male Autism Spectrum. Now, produce a vertical axis that is from prosocial at the top to antisocial at the bottom. Then use dominance submission on the z axis. That gives you a pretty good graph of how people think.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546014923 Timestamp) —“Are there some factors that contribute to bad genes ?”— Ugly asymmetric, disproportionate, people, with low neoteny, low gender dimorphism, with low intelligence, and anti-social personality disorders -vs- Beautiful symmetrical and proportional people, with high neoteny, high gender dimorphism, with high intelligence, and pro-sociality.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1546009084 Timestamp) YOU DON”T THINK OF IT BUT… Delayed marriage and reproduction not only decrease infant mortality, increase investment in children, but they force CLASS SORTITION by demonstrated evidence of success. This is the ‘big sort’ that is going on. Except we are not compensating by reducing the reproduction of the underclasses and upwardly redistributing reproduction to their betters. THIS STUFF MATTERS.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1545943056 Timestamp) RE: Nassim Nicholas Taleb ON HIS IQ RANT I will still take this debate, but not interwoven with twitter-spam. (a) g measures what we attempt to measure (b) chance of success corresponds to a distribution of traits, plus the utility of those traits, in service of the population under the bell curve within 1 SD. Those of us with exceptional abilities favor working with our region of the bell curve – puzzles – that are of INDIRECT value rather than DIRECT value. WE HAVE KNOWN THIS FOR DECADES. Lastly, we go to university etc to avoid the marketplace (‘work’). This is the value of higher education: to provide a non-market means of identifying selection. In this sense your criticism is correct. In the sense that you’re criticizing IQ measurements, you’re WRONG …PERIOD. All of this is OLD NEWS. If you want to encourage people to prosper by pairing their skills to those necessary to serve the market that they understand, then yes. If you mean very bright people are fooled by sophism, innumeracy, pseudoscience – then yes. But likewise, just as it has taken you many years to migrate from the positivist search for mathematical discovery of units of informational prediction, to the demand for warranty of due diligence (falsification), you too are vulnerable to innumeracy, pseudoscience, ‘literature’.