Curt Doolittle

Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • “Behind every raging and raving feminist is a woman desperate for male attention

    —“Behind every raging and raving feminist is a woman desperate for male attention. This is especially not to be doubted if she makes a habit of declaring openly that she does not need men or that Patriarchy is oppressive.— Alhaji Dada

  • “Behind every raging and raving feminist is a woman desperate for male attention

    —“Behind every raging and raving feminist is a woman desperate for male attention. This is especially not to be doubted if she makes a habit of declaring openly that she does not need men or that Patriarchy is oppressive.— Alhaji Dada

  • THE FEMININE POSTMODERN MIND IS NOT LOGICAL, OR RATIONAL but finds our equivalen

    THE FEMININE POSTMODERN MIND IS NOT LOGICAL, OR RATIONAL but finds our equivalent of ‘truth’ in CONSENSUS, wishful thinking, and POWER.

    Make excuses for everything that the universe, evolution, and the incentives of your fellow humans deny you from obtaining without paying the price in physical, intellectual, and emotional costs.

    It’s all theft. Rouseseuianism, Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism are just the modern era’s reaction to the loss of using cheap approval and disapproval to obtain material discounts.

    Once you understand this, you understand everything.

    The female obtains through low cost behavior, high returns.

    Modernity prohibits her from doing so.

    So she simply scales her means of shaming so that her approval obtains her rents.

    This is all there is to it. Really. That’s all there is to Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-22 08:17:00 UTC

  • The Feminine Postmodern Mind Is Not Logical, Or Rational

    THE FEMININE POSTMODERN MIND IS NOT LOGICAL, OR RATIONAL but finds our equivalent of ‘truth’ in CONSENSUS, wishful thinking, and POWER. Make excuses for everything that the universe, evolution, and the incentives of your fellow humans deny you from obtaining without paying the price in physical, intellectual, and emotional costs. It’s all theft. Rouseseuianism, Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism are just the modern era’s reaction to the loss of using cheap approval and disapproval to obtain material discounts. Once you understand this, you understand everything. The female obtains through low cost behavior, high returns. Modernity prohibits her from doing so. So she simply scales her means of shaming so that her approval obtains her rents. This is all there is to it. Really. That’s all there is to Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism.

  • The Feminine Postmodern Mind Is Not Logical, Or Rational

    THE FEMININE POSTMODERN MIND IS NOT LOGICAL, OR RATIONAL but finds our equivalent of ‘truth’ in CONSENSUS, wishful thinking, and POWER. Make excuses for everything that the universe, evolution, and the incentives of your fellow humans deny you from obtaining without paying the price in physical, intellectual, and emotional costs. It’s all theft. Rouseseuianism, Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism are just the modern era’s reaction to the loss of using cheap approval and disapproval to obtain material discounts. Once you understand this, you understand everything. The female obtains through low cost behavior, high returns. Modernity prohibits her from doing so. So she simply scales her means of shaming so that her approval obtains her rents. This is all there is to it. Really. That’s all there is to Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism.

  • What Percent Of The Population Of The World Have An Iq Below 100 And Vice Versa?

    THESE ANSWERS ARE NOT QUITE RIGHT. LET’S SEE IF WE CAN IMPROVE THEM:

    We use IQ for two different measures, WITHIN a population, and ACROSS populations.

    The best measure that I know of is to use what we today call 105, which represents approximately the IQ where an individual can repair a machine, or learn by reading instructions, rather than instruction and repetition. (IQ roughly measures the rate of learning, or rather the information requires in order for one to identify constant relations (patterns) of increasing numbers(density) of constant relations(causes)).

    General knowledge will allow you to make more use of your IQ, but it will not improve your neural ability to identify existing and potential constant relations (patterns), with ever decreasing quantity and quality of information.

    If we took the east asian population that is the worlds most homogenous ethnic group that is the world’s most pedomorphically advanced genetic group, that has done the most to kill off its underclasses, (Han/Korean/Japanese) then they would have a distribution of 100.

    If we take any other group we would have a distribution of 100. But when we compare groups to one another some groups decline and others rise. Right? So relative to the UK, Hong Kong has approximately half a standard deviation in IQ (106–108) advantage (at least in non-verbal) IQ. From conversations I’ve had with Lynn, it certainly appears that in anglodom we have lost at least that many IQ points in the past 150 years through asymmetric reproduction in anglo civilization, and as much as 12 points.

    Now, we can then recalculate 100 by the median of the new larger group, OR, we can recalculate each group to a prior demonstrated performance of a 100 individual.

    So we can describe a rolling distribution or we can describe distributions in relation to a fixed capacity.

    So it’s not really true that the world IQ average is 100. As far as I know, the world average IQ relative to the anchor of 100(UK/ENG), is in the 90’s and is getting lower every day due to asymmetric reproduction (dysgenia).

    Sorry but this subject is abused for the purposes of propaganda all the time. IQ matters. Eery point of median IQ lost in population has a tremendous cost, because langauge, norms, and institutions must exist for the median.

    As a rule of thumb. Every person under 95 is six times as costly as the productivity of every person over 105. Ergo the most benefit that any people can provide is actually not education or employment but reduction of the reproduction of the underclasses. And by underclasses the hard number is under 105.

    Uncomfortable truths are uncomfortable for a reason. They deprive us of presumed discounts.

    https://www.quora.com/What-percent-of-the-population-of-the-world-have-an-IQ-below-100-and-vice-versa

  • What Percent Of The Population Of The World Have An Iq Below 100 And Vice Versa?

    THESE ANSWERS ARE NOT QUITE RIGHT. LET’S SEE IF WE CAN IMPROVE THEM:

    We use IQ for two different measures, WITHIN a population, and ACROSS populations.

    The best measure that I know of is to use what we today call 105, which represents approximately the IQ where an individual can repair a machine, or learn by reading instructions, rather than instruction and repetition. (IQ roughly measures the rate of learning, or rather the information requires in order for one to identify constant relations (patterns) of increasing numbers(density) of constant relations(causes)).

    General knowledge will allow you to make more use of your IQ, but it will not improve your neural ability to identify existing and potential constant relations (patterns), with ever decreasing quantity and quality of information.

    If we took the east asian population that is the worlds most homogenous ethnic group that is the world’s most pedomorphically advanced genetic group, that has done the most to kill off its underclasses, (Han/Korean/Japanese) then they would have a distribution of 100.

    If we take any other group we would have a distribution of 100. But when we compare groups to one another some groups decline and others rise. Right? So relative to the UK, Hong Kong has approximately half a standard deviation in IQ (106–108) advantage (at least in non-verbal) IQ. From conversations I’ve had with Lynn, it certainly appears that in anglodom we have lost at least that many IQ points in the past 150 years through asymmetric reproduction in anglo civilization, and as much as 12 points.

    Now, we can then recalculate 100 by the median of the new larger group, OR, we can recalculate each group to a prior demonstrated performance of a 100 individual.

    So we can describe a rolling distribution or we can describe distributions in relation to a fixed capacity.

    So it’s not really true that the world IQ average is 100. As far as I know, the world average IQ relative to the anchor of 100(UK/ENG), is in the 90’s and is getting lower every day due to asymmetric reproduction (dysgenia).

    Sorry but this subject is abused for the purposes of propaganda all the time. IQ matters. Eery point of median IQ lost in population has a tremendous cost, because langauge, norms, and institutions must exist for the median.

    As a rule of thumb. Every person under 95 is six times as costly as the productivity of every person over 105. Ergo the most benefit that any people can provide is actually not education or employment but reduction of the reproduction of the underclasses. And by underclasses the hard number is under 105.

    Uncomfortable truths are uncomfortable for a reason. They deprive us of presumed discounts.

    https://www.quora.com/What-percent-of-the-population-of-the-world-have-an-IQ-below-100-and-vice-versa

  • “CURT: WHY DO LIBERTARIANS EAT EACH OTHER?”— Very smart question. 1) Men seek

    –“CURT: WHY DO LIBERTARIANS EAT EACH OTHER?”—

    Very smart question.

    1) Men seek status internally and externally by demonstration of superiority in competitions. So geeks fight verbal battles, from positions of relative safety, in an arena where there are enough of them that such competitions are possible (it’s hard to find other smart people in the real world)

    2) men seek to learn by competition rather than by submission which is why women do better in universities and men do better in competitive forums where they do not have to please but WIN.

    3) Men operate in tribes the way women operate with close friends. They seek hierarchies of peers where they can test their positions. Women seek common ground and then hen peck, while men fight for status and accommodate competitors. These tribes form along class and kin boundaries. Most friends are but three degrees of genetic distance from you.

    Language is commensurable across these differences so we tend to attribute more similarity to our thinking than exists. Our thinking exists to justify (make excuses for) our impulses and our impulses are genetically determined.

    The differences between male brains and female brains is now fairly well understood, and all of these things are understandable just like they are in other animals.

    We just use a lot of words to deny it.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-21 11:36:00 UTC

  • –“Curt: Why Do Libertarians Eat Each Other?”—

    –“CURT: WHY DO LIBERTARIANS EAT EACH OTHER?”— Very smart question. 1) Men seek status internally and externally by demonstration of superiority in competitions. So geeks fight verbal battles, from positions of relative safety, in an arena where there are enough of them that such competitions are possible (it’s hard to find other smart people in the real world) 2) men seek to learn by competition rather than by submission which is why women do better in universities and men do better in competitive forums where they do not have to please but WIN. 3) Men operate in tribes the way women operate with close friends. They seek hierarchies of peers where they can test their positions. Women seek common ground and then hen peck, while men fight for status and accommodate competitors. These tribes form along class and kin boundaries. Most friends are but three degrees of genetic distance from you. Language is commensurable across these differences so we tend to attribute more similarity to our thinking than exists. Our thinking exists to justify (make excuses for) our impulses and our impulses are genetically determined. The differences between male brains and female brains is now fairly well understood, and all of these things are understandable just like they are in other animals. We just use a lot of words to deny it.

  • –“Curt: Why Do Libertarians Eat Each Other?”—

    –“CURT: WHY DO LIBERTARIANS EAT EACH OTHER?”— Very smart question. 1) Men seek status internally and externally by demonstration of superiority in competitions. So geeks fight verbal battles, from positions of relative safety, in an arena where there are enough of them that such competitions are possible (it’s hard to find other smart people in the real world) 2) men seek to learn by competition rather than by submission which is why women do better in universities and men do better in competitive forums where they do not have to please but WIN. 3) Men operate in tribes the way women operate with close friends. They seek hierarchies of peers where they can test their positions. Women seek common ground and then hen peck, while men fight for status and accommodate competitors. These tribes form along class and kin boundaries. Most friends are but three degrees of genetic distance from you. Language is commensurable across these differences so we tend to attribute more similarity to our thinking than exists. Our thinking exists to justify (make excuses for) our impulses and our impulses are genetically determined. The differences between male brains and female brains is now fairly well understood, and all of these things are understandable just like they are in other animals. We just use a lot of words to deny it.