Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • CHILD-THINKING, WOMEN THINKING, NOT MAN THINKING —“The only thing anyone needs

    CHILD-THINKING, WOMEN THINKING, NOT MAN THINKING

    —“The only thing anyone needs to live a good life is “be excellent to each other.”if everyone did that or tried their best to do that,the world would be fine. You’re all spouting philosophical bollocks.pipe down and be nice.”—

    No, if enough people do that then they are overwhelmed by the people who don’t.

    High trust is advantageous in-group but a tragic weakness outgrip.

    That’s just (a) operational analysis, and (b) empirical evidence.

    You cannot model a polity, set of polities, or all polities as naive extensions of the family. And that is what you are doing.

    People compete for advantage at all times, and the value of high trust dissipates rapidly outside of family and community.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-03 08:23:00 UTC

  • Women need to feel others, like men need to fire gaze. Same Need, Different Stim

    Women need to feel others, like men need to fire gaze. Same Need, Different Stimuli.
  • Women need to feel others, like men need to fire gaze. Same Need, Different Stim

    Women need to feel others, like men need to fire gaze. Same Need, Different Stimuli.
  • Women need to feel others, like men need to fire gaze. Same Need, Different Stim

    Women need to feel others, like men need to fire gaze. Same Need, Different Stimuli.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-02 12:09:00 UTC

  • Progressives Feel Unique, Emotional, Anxious (Mothers To Children). Conservatives Feel Groupish, Success, And Religion (Groupis

    (via James Santagata) —“From Twitter. Based on previous findings, we hypothesized that the language used by liberals emphasizes their perception of uniqueness, contains more swear words, more anxiety-related words and more feeling-related words than conservatives’ language. Conversely, we predicted that the language of conservatives emphasizes group membership and contains more references to achievement and religion than liberals’ language. We analysed Twitter timelines of 5,373 followers of three Twitter accounts of the American Democratic and 5,386 followers of three accounts of the Republican parties’ Congressional Organizations. The results support most of the predictions and previous findings, confirming that Twitter behaviour offers valid insights to offline behaviour.”–
  • Progressives Feel Unique, Emotional, Anxious (Mothers To Children). Conservatives Feel Groupish, Success, And Religion (Groupis

    (via James Santagata) —“From Twitter. Based on previous findings, we hypothesized that the language used by liberals emphasizes their perception of uniqueness, contains more swear words, more anxiety-related words and more feeling-related words than conservatives’ language. Conversely, we predicted that the language of conservatives emphasizes group membership and contains more references to achievement and religion than liberals’ language. We analysed Twitter timelines of 5,373 followers of three Twitter accounts of the American Democratic and 5,386 followers of three accounts of the Republican parties’ Congressional Organizations. The results support most of the predictions and previous findings, confirming that Twitter behaviour offers valid insights to offline behaviour.”–
  • PROGRESSIVES FEEL UNIQUE, EMOTIONAL, ANXIOUS (MOTHERS TO CHILDREN). CONSERVATIVE

    PROGRESSIVES FEEL UNIQUE, EMOTIONAL, ANXIOUS (MOTHERS TO CHILDREN). CONSERVATIVES FEEL GROUPISH, SUCCESS, AND RELIGION (GROUPISHNESS AGAIN),

    (via James Santagata)

    —“From Twitter. Based on previous findings, we hypothesized that the language used by liberals emphasizes their perception of uniqueness, contains more swear words, more anxiety-related words and more feeling-related words than conservatives’ language.

    Conversely, we predicted that the language of conservatives emphasizes group membership and contains more references to achievement and religion than liberals’ language.

    We analysed Twitter timelines of 5,373 followers of three Twitter accounts of the American Democratic and 5,386 followers of three accounts of the Republican parties’ Congressional Organizations.

    The results support most of the predictions and previous findings, confirming that Twitter behaviour offers valid insights to offline behaviour.”–


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-01 12:25:00 UTC

  • —-”What do you think is the hardest thing to do?”—- To tolerate the Vox Populi’s

    —-”What do you think is the hardest thing to do?”—-
    To tolerate the Vox Populi’s universal Dunning-Kruger confidence, moral indignation, and petty righteousness. People run with scissors of ignorance. Everything else is just a matter of doing a bit of time and effort.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-28 23:14:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/968987840502788096

  • Psychology Is A Pseudoscience – A Philosophy Gradually Overcoming 150 Years Of Outright Nonsense. Here Is The Alter

    1 – if you get mises and hoppe’s property rights analysis, and just add property-in -toto, so that you end up with acquisitionism. 2 – If you then take the cognitive biases you see how evolution fucked with us to keep us taking risks (acting, exploring) within our energy limits. 3 – Then take five factors, then ten dimensions of personality. 4 – Then take those factors and map them to phases of the prey drive on y axis, and male vs female reproductive strategies on the x-axis, and you have all of psychology. 5 – Then take haidt’s moral categories and express them as property rights, and you have all of political psychology and sociology. 6 – Then all you have is reciprocity > individual violations of reciprocity > gender violations of reciprocity > class and group violations of reciprocity > and group evolutionary violations of reciprocity, and you have all of politics. In other words, we can cooperate honestly on one hand, and we can game each other on the other, and we can game each other at every scale from the individual to the nation. I mean, really, it’s all that simple. That’s the boring science of it. We are very obvious gene machines that create fictions in order to cooperate while maintaining the optimum level of cheating possible within the available limits of cooperation. Psychology either takes that scientific position, or it takes a fictionalist position. Most of us want a fictionalist position when we are young so that we can ‘feel’. Some of us want a fictionalist position when we are developing, so that we can strategize for an advantage. Some of us who mature want a justification of our strategy to provide positive feedback for our immoral successes, or our personal weakness and failings. Some people don’t fictionalize at all, they just compete without doing harm. They are the defacto natural elite. The Truth is very simple. But the number of fictions we have invented to complicate what is very obviously the rational actions of a selfish animal in competition with other superpredators – and thereby obscure our hierarchy of immoralities. But such fictions allow us to form coalitions of people with the same immoralities (systems of parasitism). Just as much as the truth would allow us to form coalitions of people with no immoralities and no parasitisms. The difference is very simple: only a superior people would choose Sovereignty, reciprocity, truth(empiricism, operationalism), and markets in everything – because only a superior people can compete by sovereign, reciprocal, truthful, trusting, and market-competitive means. And only inferior people would choose an alternative. Hence the few use truth and markets and the many use fictionalisms. Because there are so few who are superior to the mass of humanity. And very few men are of sufficient agency to acknowledge these truths.
  • Psychology Is A Pseudoscience – A Philosophy Gradually Overcoming 150 Years Of Outright Nonsense. Here Is The Alter

    1 – if you get mises and hoppe’s property rights analysis, and just add property-in -toto, so that you end up with acquisitionism. 2 – If you then take the cognitive biases you see how evolution fucked with us to keep us taking risks (acting, exploring) within our energy limits. 3 – Then take five factors, then ten dimensions of personality. 4 – Then take those factors and map them to phases of the prey drive on y axis, and male vs female reproductive strategies on the x-axis, and you have all of psychology. 5 – Then take haidt’s moral categories and express them as property rights, and you have all of political psychology and sociology. 6 – Then all you have is reciprocity > individual violations of reciprocity > gender violations of reciprocity > class and group violations of reciprocity > and group evolutionary violations of reciprocity, and you have all of politics. In other words, we can cooperate honestly on one hand, and we can game each other on the other, and we can game each other at every scale from the individual to the nation. I mean, really, it’s all that simple. That’s the boring science of it. We are very obvious gene machines that create fictions in order to cooperate while maintaining the optimum level of cheating possible within the available limits of cooperation. Psychology either takes that scientific position, or it takes a fictionalist position. Most of us want a fictionalist position when we are young so that we can ‘feel’. Some of us want a fictionalist position when we are developing, so that we can strategize for an advantage. Some of us who mature want a justification of our strategy to provide positive feedback for our immoral successes, or our personal weakness and failings. Some people don’t fictionalize at all, they just compete without doing harm. They are the defacto natural elite. The Truth is very simple. But the number of fictions we have invented to complicate what is very obviously the rational actions of a selfish animal in competition with other superpredators – and thereby obscure our hierarchy of immoralities. But such fictions allow us to form coalitions of people with the same immoralities (systems of parasitism). Just as much as the truth would allow us to form coalitions of people with no immoralities and no parasitisms. The difference is very simple: only a superior people would choose Sovereignty, reciprocity, truth(empiricism, operationalism), and markets in everything – because only a superior people can compete by sovereign, reciprocal, truthful, trusting, and market-competitive means. And only inferior people would choose an alternative. Hence the few use truth and markets and the many use fictionalisms. Because there are so few who are superior to the mass of humanity. And very few men are of sufficient agency to acknowledge these truths.