Curt Doolittle

Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • —“Are the far left or the far right more intelligent?”—

    I did quite a bit of research on this in the mid 00’s when a number of left leaning surveys were published that I was pretty sure were wrong. They were. (Especially about mental illness, which appears to be a near monopoly on the left because of the dominance of women on the left. Why? Because males demonstrate anti social behavior by criminality and females demonstrate antisocial behavior by psychosis. Hence why a third of american women are on anti-depressants.) Here is the summary: a) Republicans are smarter than democrats.b) Liberals are smarter than conservatives.c) And libertarians are smartest of all. Moreover: d) People vote by moral intuition because they have no other choice under representative first-past-the-post, two party, government. (See “Myth of the Rational Voter”.) e) Men bias to organize by packs (precision at the cost of consensus), and women bias to organize as herd (consensus at the cost of precision). This means men are less likely to pursue consensus, and instead specialize. Hence the relative heterogeneity of the right compared to the relative homogeneity of the left. Ergo democracies always move left until failure while anglo civilization using hoses for the classes merely had civil wars to reorganize the law to include newly productive classes. f) People vote heavily by race and religion, with single white women the only group ‘defecting’. In some sense, single women determine most presidential outcomes for this reason. Without women voters we would never have had a leftist president. (See Pew.) Why? There are very (painfully) obvious reasons: 1 – Advocates use college degrees as a proxy for intelligence without mediating for the IQ distribution of degrees. In other words, a Phd in Education is rated more highly than bachelors degree in engineering or computer science, yet graduates with those degrees possess the inverse IQ relationship. 2 – Women at the lower end of the distribution disproportionately obtain (nonsense) degrees while men simply enter the work force without them. 3 – There are very few liberals, and very many conservatives. There are very few libertarians and very many democrats. In other words, when you compare democrats and republicans that’s categorically the same as comparing libertarians and leftists. The difference is that liberals will have soft degrees and libertarians will have hard (STEM) degrees. But if you mix categories (liberals and conservatives) then you are comparing vastly different distributions by very different criteria. 

    <- Liberal -- Democrat - independent - Republican -- Libertarian ->
<- Female Reproductive Strategy <---> Male Reproductive Strategy ->

    That’s why.

  • The reason we have cognitive science is because psychology was pure nonsense and

    The reason we have cognitive science is because psychology was pure nonsense and so a group branched off to create a science where previously there was none.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-04 21:17:00 UTC

  • HEALTH We are not the same. we have different genes and processes and needs. The

    HEALTH

    We are not the same. we have different genes and processes and needs. The truth is that if you are getting enough exercise your body will tell you what to eat via cravings. If you are struggling to define what you need to eat via then you are not getting enough exercise. Most foods i see today are used as sedatives for lack of exercise, sociability, and rest. If you are using food as a curative or sedative you’re working on the wrong problem. It’s fitness, socialization, and rest.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-04 20:46:00 UTC

  • The Problem of Current Families

    It’s better stated that women have costly opportunities but have little competition, and males have cheap opportunities and infinite competition; and that women are trying to capture better opportunities and men are simply trying to increase the number of opportunities. ( Ergo, larger testicals for polyamorous apes and smaller testicals for dominant apes. ) There is nothing natural about*lifetime* monogamy, and everything natural about serial pairing off. The reason being *classes*. Pairing off provides Nash Optimums, just as much as markets produce Pareto Distributions. The problem with lifetime monogamy is that it evolved with and is dependent upon PROPERTY. For some people that property is part of the shared attraction (status). For others it is not so – they lack marginally sufficient productive ability to produce status signals, or to alter their sexual, social, economic, political, and military market values. Ergo we should see Power Couples at the top with lifetime marriages, affairs in the mature middle class, but preservation of lifetime monogamy, serial relationships in the lower classes. Which is what we see. One of the consequences of post industrial wealth (caused by the capture of energy) is that we can afford to pursue our preferences rather than have those preferences constrained by the previous conditions. This is what we see. We see vast exploration of preferences because we can afford to explore them (conduct research protgrams, and either succeed or fail) but at some point we have to measure the externalities produced, and that is what conservatives do…. we measure the intertemporal consequences. We are the long term ‘limiters’ that defend the gene pool – or fail to. The economic consequences of pairing off are substantial. The economic consequences of lifetime monogamy are substantial. The economic consequences of homogeneity and eugenic reproduction are substantial. In fact, they might be the most substantial. The way we restore these very-high-returns is simply *to stop funding alternatives thru redistribution* and let meritocracy reign again. That will produce families, and suppress underclass reproduction, and as a consequence produce greater wealth.

  • The Problem of Current Families

    It’s better stated that women have costly opportunities but have little competition, and males have cheap opportunities and infinite competition; and that women are trying to capture better opportunities and men are simply trying to increase the number of opportunities. ( Ergo, larger testicals for polyamorous apes and smaller testicals for dominant apes. ) There is nothing natural about*lifetime* monogamy, and everything natural about serial pairing off. The reason being *classes*. Pairing off provides Nash Optimums, just as much as markets produce Pareto Distributions. The problem with lifetime monogamy is that it evolved with and is dependent upon PROPERTY. For some people that property is part of the shared attraction (status). For others it is not so – they lack marginally sufficient productive ability to produce status signals, or to alter their sexual, social, economic, political, and military market values. Ergo we should see Power Couples at the top with lifetime marriages, affairs in the mature middle class, but preservation of lifetime monogamy, serial relationships in the lower classes. Which is what we see. One of the consequences of post industrial wealth (caused by the capture of energy) is that we can afford to pursue our preferences rather than have those preferences constrained by the previous conditions. This is what we see. We see vast exploration of preferences because we can afford to explore them (conduct research protgrams, and either succeed or fail) but at some point we have to measure the externalities produced, and that is what conservatives do…. we measure the intertemporal consequences. We are the long term ‘limiters’ that defend the gene pool – or fail to. The economic consequences of pairing off are substantial. The economic consequences of lifetime monogamy are substantial. The economic consequences of homogeneity and eugenic reproduction are substantial. In fact, they might be the most substantial. The way we restore these very-high-returns is simply *to stop funding alternatives thru redistribution* and let meritocracy reign again. That will produce families, and suppress underclass reproduction, and as a consequence produce greater wealth.

  • More People Are Mentally Ill than Is Obvious

    Far more people are mentally ill than is obvious from daily discourse. The principle reason is that they are vastly under socialized and their less than able minds are not constrained by continuous training under pressure of peers. Americans are de facto crazy, where other peoples are de facto escapist, religious, or superstitious. This is because we have attributed to and demanded from ordinary people the agency of the middle, upper middle and upper classes. And the fact is that the reason people are in the middle and upper classes is precisely because they possess agency that others do not.

  • More People Are Mentally Ill than Is Obvious

    Far more people are mentally ill than is obvious from daily discourse. The principle reason is that they are vastly under socialized and their less than able minds are not constrained by continuous training under pressure of peers. Americans are de facto crazy, where other peoples are de facto escapist, religious, or superstitious. This is because we have attributed to and demanded from ordinary people the agency of the middle, upper middle and upper classes. And the fact is that the reason people are in the middle and upper classes is precisely because they possess agency that others do not.

  • I … I don’t know what ‘equality’ means. No human group circumvents interperson

    I … I don’t know what ‘equality’ means. No human group circumvents interpersonal status. Westerners are just very good at paying cost of ‘loss of face’ as an act of social good. I suspect you do not grasp what I refer to. There is much equality in chinese culture in many ways.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-04 17:23:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/981582957914787845

    Reply addressees: @Superhero_sky

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/981582132106510337

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Superhero_sky

    @curtdoolittle I saw you say that there is no equality in China, as a Chinese, I am against this, if it is convenient, give me your Facebook,

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/981582132106510337

  • Far more people are mentally ill than is obvious from daily discourse. The princ

    Far more people are mentally ill than is obvious from daily discourse. The principle reason is that they are vastly under socialized and their less than able minds are not constrained by continuous training under pressure of peers.

    Americans are de facto crazy, where other peoples are de facto escapist, religious, or superstitious. This is because we have attributed to and demanded from ordinary people the agency of the middle, upper middle and upper classes.

    And the fact is that the reason people are in the middle and upper classes is precisely because they possess agency that others do not.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-04 11:30:00 UTC

  • What is the cause of Scandinavian (including British) virtue signaling and virtu

    What is the cause of Scandinavian (including British) virtue signaling and virtue spirals? I mean, seriously. It is just a wealth effect and the absence of competitors on borders?

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-04 11:05:00 UTC