“The Democratic Majority Fallacy” |CAUSALITY| .01% -> 1% -> 20% -> EVERYONE ELSE. That is that historically it only takes 1-2% and no more than 3% of a (male) population to cause revolutionary destructive harm, just as it takes only 1-2% to create revolutionary productive good. The success of either end of the spectrum depends upon the state of development of the people, their degree of heterogeneity, the consequential degree of disparity, the consequential degree of competition, and the percentage of the populace that will practice alternative norms. Norms create a market for cooperation. Markets for production AFTER the market for norms (cooperation), and markets for commons after production, and markets for polities after commons. So no. It matters more if 1% of immigrants are hostile than it does if 1% of citizens are fully domesticated. Don’t let democratic reasoning fool you. The Pareto rule and the power laws ALWAYS rule – FROM EVERY DIRECTION. .5% of a hostile populace is enough. Abrahamism, particularly militant, fundamentalist, irreciprocal, equalitarian, anti-reason abrahamism, is the equivalent of a single cancer cell. It spreads rapidly and kills everything it touches from the inside out. Judaism was bad, christianity, worse, and islam the very worst. Islam(Judaism, Christianity) = Monopoly. Paganism = Markets. IT’S NOT COMPLICATED: MARKETS IN EVERYTHING TO EVOLVE, OR DEVOLUTION AND REGRESSION.
Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science
-
Gender Strategies
That’s probably a good way of positioning our gender roles and our cognitive differences: -Female Work to Create The Good – Via Positiva (progressive)-Male Work to Eradicate The Bad – Via Negativa (conservative) While all market participants seek disequilibrium, all markets must produce equilibria in order to compete.
-
Gender Strategies
That’s probably a good way of positioning our gender roles and our cognitive differences: -Female Work to Create The Good – Via Positiva (progressive)-Male Work to Eradicate The Bad – Via Negativa (conservative) While all market participants seek disequilibrium, all markets must produce equilibria in order to compete.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status. MAGICAL THINKING –“Magical thinking is the a
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
MAGICAL THINKING
–“Magical thinking is the attribution of causal or synchronistic relationships between actions and events which seemingly cannot be justified by reason and observation. In religion, folk religion, and superstitious beliefs, the posited correlation is often between religious ritual, prayer, sacrifice, or the observance of a taboo, and an expected benefit or recompense.”–
As you move east and south this seems to increases rapidly
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-18 01:09:43 UTC
-
Three Axis of Cognitive Speciation
(core concept that simplifies propertarianism) There are only so many evolutionary venues available for human speciation given our adaptation after the development of language is largely cognitive: (a) neoteny(or its reversal) (b) gender dimorphism (or its reversal) Now, dimorphism generally refers to externally visible structural differences, however we have significant internal structural differences (neurological) as well as structural differences in neurochemistry (velocity and incentives). Ideal human adaptivity requires increasing neoteny, and increasing dimorphism (specialization). So some groups are more evolutionarily advanced than others. We must then adapt to our in group distributions. That produces cultural and strategic specialization. But in the end we are largely varying and SPECIATING along the gender, neotonic, and distributional axis. x—> gender y—> neoteny z—> distribution <Truth/Moral <— superiority—-inferiority—>False/Immoral>
-
Three Axis of Cognitive Speciation
(core concept that simplifies propertarianism) There are only so many evolutionary venues available for human speciation given our adaptation after the development of language is largely cognitive: (a) neoteny(or its reversal) (b) gender dimorphism (or its reversal) Now, dimorphism generally refers to externally visible structural differences, however we have significant internal structural differences (neurological) as well as structural differences in neurochemistry (velocity and incentives). Ideal human adaptivity requires increasing neoteny, and increasing dimorphism (specialization). So some groups are more evolutionarily advanced than others. We must then adapt to our in group distributions. That produces cultural and strategic specialization. But in the end we are largely varying and SPECIATING along the gender, neotonic, and distributional axis. x—> gender y—> neoteny z—> distribution <Truth/Moral <— superiority—-inferiority—>False/Immoral>
-
Punishing Free Riders Begins Early
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618779061?journalCode=pssa—“… children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders … “— (Via James Santagata) “Human flourishing depends on individuals paying costs to contribute to the common good, but such arrangements are vulnerable to free riding, in which individuals benefit from others’ contributions without paying costs themselves. Systems of tracking and sanctioning free riders can stabilize cooperation, but the origin of such tendencies is not well understood. Here, we provide evidence that children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders. Across six studies, we showed that these tendencies are robust, large in magnitude, tuned to intentional rather than unintentional noncontribution, and generally consistent across third- and first-party cases. Further, these effects cannot be accounted for by factors that frequently co-occur with free riding, such as nonconforming behaviors or the costs that free riding imposes on the group. Our findings demonstrate that from early in life, children both hold and enforce a normative expectation that individuals are intrinsically obligated to contribute to the common good.” http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618779061?journalCode=pssa& -
Punishing Free Riders Begins Early
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618779061?journalCode=pssa—“… children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders … “— (Via James Santagata) “Human flourishing depends on individuals paying costs to contribute to the common good, but such arrangements are vulnerable to free riding, in which individuals benefit from others’ contributions without paying costs themselves. Systems of tracking and sanctioning free riders can stabilize cooperation, but the origin of such tendencies is not well understood. Here, we provide evidence that children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders. Across six studies, we showed that these tendencies are robust, large in magnitude, tuned to intentional rather than unintentional noncontribution, and generally consistent across third- and first-party cases. Further, these effects cannot be accounted for by factors that frequently co-occur with free riding, such as nonconforming behaviors or the costs that free riding imposes on the group. Our findings demonstrate that from early in life, children both hold and enforce a normative expectation that individuals are intrinsically obligated to contribute to the common good.” http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618779061?journalCode=pssa& -
Curt Doolittle shared a link. PUNISHING FREE RIDERS BEGINS EARLY —“… childre
Curt Doolittle shared a link.
PUNISHING FREE RIDERS BEGINS EARLY
—“… children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders … “—
(Via James Santagata)
“Human flourishing depends on individuals paying costs to contribute to the common good, but such arrangements are vulnerable to free riding, in which individuals benefit from othersâ contributions without paying costs themselves. Systems of tracking and sanctioning free riders can stabilize cooperation, but the origin of such tendencies is not well understood. Here, we provide evidence that children as young as 4 years old negatively evaluate and sanction free riders. Across six studies, we showed that these tendencies are robust, large in magnitude, tuned to intentional rather than unintentional noncontribution, and generally consistent across third- and first-party cases. Further, these effects cannot be accounted for by factors that frequently co-occur with free riding, such as nonconforming behaviors or the costs that free riding imposes on the group. Our findings demonstrate that from early in life, children both hold and enforce a normative expectation that individuals are intrinsically obligated to contribute to the common good.”
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618779061?journalCode=pssa&
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 17:57:53 UTC
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status. THREE AXIS OF COGNITIVE SPECIATION (core conc
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
THREE AXIS OF COGNITIVE SPECIATION
(core concept that simplifies propertarianism)
There are only so many evolutionary venues available for human speciation given our adaptation after the development of language is largely cognitive:
(a) neoteny(or its reversal) (b) gender dimorphism (or its reversal)
Now, dimorphism generally refers to externally visible structural differences, however we have significant internal structural differences (neurological) as well as structural differences in neurochemistry (velocity and incentives).
Ideal human adaptivity requires increasing neoteny, and increasing dimorphism (specialization).
So some groups are more evolutionarily advanced than others.
We must then adapt to our in group distributions. That produces cultural and strategic specialization.
But in the end we are largely varying and SPECIATING along the gender, neotonic, and distributional axis.
x—> gender
y—> neoteny
z—> distribution
<Truth/Moral <— superiority—-inferiority—>False/Immoral>
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-17 15:55:48 UTC