Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • FWIW 2: Smart guys always find girls. And the girls they find, generally stick w

    FWIW 2: Smart guys always find girls. And the girls they find, generally stick with them.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 20:07:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/858049951946952704

    Reply addressees: @Anime_Math @jebhead2016

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/857981178636316673


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @Anime_Math @jebhead2016 FWIW: i didnt make it. And i used the quote from genghis khan to illustrate the fallacy of the Rousseaian, Lockeian, Boazian theories.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/857981178636316673


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @Anime_Math @jebhead2016 FWIW: i didnt make it. And i used the quote from genghis khan to illustrate the fallacy of the Rousseaian, Lockeian, Boazian theories.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/857981178636316673

  • (for archiving) Running is a very efficient form of energy expenditure and if yo

    (for archiving)

    Running is a very efficient form of energy expenditure and if you don’t overdo it, you won’t hurt yourself very easily. You can get the same value out of hiking or walking at the cost of increasing time at exercise. So running is just efficient. But it works the same muscle groups and it actually can make you injury prone unless its over uneven terrain. (Spoken as someone who spent a year taping his feet to recover from plantar fascia injuries.)

    One of the reasons that the military has always focused on marching twenty miles or more with gear is to build up minor muscles, build cardio, pulmonary, liver, and kidney efficiency, is that it’s makes you exhausted, but exposes you to little risk of injury. Moreover it depletes your brain and combined with surprise commands, teaches you how to function ‘explosively’ on demand even when you are cognitively impaired. If you look at the special forces guys they are athletes not weight lifters. It is far easier to pass endurance stress while retaining mental discipline – which is the test of special forces – if you are able to perform while physically and cognitively depleted.

    The problem is fitness vs bulk. The bigger you get the more calories, oxygen, cardio, and pulmonary you need, and you generally lose the most important ‘aryan’ advantages: speed, agility, and endurance (ooda loops).

    As far as I know complex motions like ‘rolling that big industrial tire’, chopping wood, crawling across grass or swimming, and climbing trees and ladders, all produce the best overall fitness without damage. (I have only had injuries lifting weights, because it is very easy to ‘overdo’ it on minor muscles with )

    However, if you are careful and just lift a few heavy things a few times a week, plus walk a bit, you can achieve almost all of the good. So, weight decreases time.

    Unfortunately, those of us with asthma face a constant challenge. Even though I was the fastest sprinter in my class in grade school I have never been able to run distances. I can hike at fairly good pace now that I’m no longer seriously ill, and I can walk pretty much forever. And I can get away with a sprint. But lifting has become almost unbearable. When it was, for most of my life, my favorite way of staying fit. The most fit I have ever been is working an office job, using a simple barbell set at home before work. I naturally walk around a lot, even if writing. The big decline in my fitness was my long struggle with my health. When I tried crossfit while still carrying cancer around, I seriously thought it would die.

    It is non trivial to function competitively while deprived of sleep, water, food, while physically and mentally exhausted, hot or cold, and stressed from the possibility of being killed by a bullet at distance.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 17:32:00 UTC

  • THE JOY OF MORAL LICENSE TO USE VIOLENCE Men need moral license. They are all to

    THE JOY OF MORAL LICENSE TO USE VIOLENCE

    Men need moral license. They are all too happy to use violence when they have any chance of survival. There is nothing more spiritual than hunting, and nothing more exciting than hunting men. And once they experience it, they like it so much, they are often hard to return to previous condition. There is nothing more dangerous to a people than the soldiers who return for the peace.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-27 17:21:00 UTC

  • “The capacity to delay gratification is like interest: those who understand it,

    —“The capacity to delay gratification is like interest: those who understand it, make it (interest); those that don’t understand, pay it – in spades.”—Anne Tripp


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-25 15:01:00 UTC

  • IS VERY OFTEN OFFENSIVE. WHICH IS WHY WE MUST SEARCH FOR IT – BECAUSE WE HIDE IT

    https://www.quora.com/Why-are-women-often-portrayed-as-symbol-of-evil-or-weakness/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=b08d0e43&srid=u4QvTRUTH IS VERY OFTEN OFFENSIVE. WHICH IS WHY WE MUST SEARCH FOR IT – BECAUSE WE HIDE IT. BUT HERE IS THE ANSWER.

    1. Women (females) evolved gossip, rallying, shaming, trading of care-taking, sex and affection, as a means of manipulation (power), by which to gain control over (much) more powerful males.

    2. Women (females) are not loyal to the tribe (males), as they could be easily stolen by one group or another, and have to survive within that group. Female choice arose late (after pairing-off).

    3. Women can (and often did, and still do) bear one man’s offspring at the cost of another man, thereby depriving him of the ability to trade his productivity for sex, affection, care-taking, and offspring. As many as one third of children ‘appear’ to have been the product of ‘sleeping around’. Our understanding of this number will improve over time. Around 70% of women reproduced in history, but only about 30% of men. Our understanding of this number will improve over time. However, men (out of evolutionary necessity) will demonstrate violence over women first and foremost above all other factors. (yes really). The vast majority of male impulsive violence is somehow connected to females. So female ‘wandering’ is the most dangerous to the tribe of any activity including theft and murder.

    4. Women evolved a very short term set of impulses (low risk tolerance) in order to limit their own cellular damage, and to protect the fragility of children that take so many years to mature into self-sufficiency. Women possess less ‘agency’ because of it. Despite our status as super-predators, or apex predators, Humans are frail and especially frail until maturity. Ergo, women ‘feel’ impulsively and cannot suppress their impulses as easily as men can. Nor are social structures to contain women’s impulses as severe as those of males. The reason being that an impulsive woman can be ignored or beaten,while an impulsive male can be sent off to fight or hunt, but may become too dangerous in the tribe or polity.

    5. So, because of high impulsivity, short term bias, the ability to sway men with sex, affection, caretaking, and the ability to sway men with gossip, rallying, and shaming, women were (and still are, to be honest) considered to be ‘troublemakers’.

    6. We tend to think of taming violence among men as the chief achievement of civlization, but that is not what the evidence tells us. It was equally the use of property and marriage to tame women’s gossip, reproduction, and impulsivity that built civilization. Even today, the root cause of central political conflicts is whether (a) women have a ‘right’ to bear children that they cannot create a family or career to support without forcing others to pay for their ‘freedom’, because the only remaining problem facing mankind at present is population. all problems today are reducible to population problems. (b) whether we advance universalism and dysgenia (the female and underclass reproductive strategy), or particularism and eugenia (the male and upper class reproductive strategy).

    7. Western women have always been ‘freer’ that other women, and we are not exactly sure why. It appears that whites are less clannish (at least circumpolar whites, if not anatolian/iranian). Whites have less testosterone than all but east asians. There is some evidence that white female traits were especially desirable and spread quickly through selection and were integrated through selection into white males. There is some evidence that the scarcity of people in the northern climes, the value of ‘others’ in northern climes for survival; the ‘homogeneity’ of the three or four major waves of europeans plus the limited clannishness simply created a less hostile environment for mate selection. (This is the current hypothesis). It will take another generation of work on genetics before we know the answer for certain. But needless to say, whites (at least northerners) are less ‘clannish’ than all other races and subraces. Conversely, africans, desert, and steppe peoples appear more clannish and more aggressive than far east and far west peoples. This appears to be due to little more than the scale of the underclasses in warm climates. Without selection pressures the median behavior evolves into a general rule.

    8. So history is hard on women because women in fact are (a) physically weaker, (b) emotionally more impulsive and possessed of less agency (weaker), (c) the cause of hidden constant conflict, if not constrained, (d) unloyal to the tribe.

    9. Education and participation in the work force has done quite a bit to solve women’s impulsivity but women have, since the introduction of socialism, and the feminist movement as a proxy replacement for socialism, worked consistently to vote (a) to destroy the requirement to form a family (corporation for the production of children), prior to bearing offspring, (b) impoverishing men and causing vast increases in suicide through no fault divorce, alimony, and child support, and heavy increases in taxes that consume 100% of the revenues produced by the addition of women to the work force. (c) harm to the ‘tribe’ by making possible the immigration policies since the 1960’s that achieved through underclass immigration what could not be achieved either through advocacy of socialism, or advocacy of feminism.

    10. The West survived the European civil war we call the World Wars. Yet the West will not likely survive the enfranchisement of women without equal investment in the constraint upon women’s behavior that was developed to constrain men’s behavior over the past 10,000 years.

    11. Pandora deserved her reputation. The question is. Men admit their history. Can women admit theirs? History, biology, and evolution are against it.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-25 09:43:00 UTC

  • Why Are Women Often Portrayed As Symbol Of Evil Or Weakness?

    TRUTH IS VERY OFTEN OFFENSIVE. WHICH IS WHY WE MUST SEARCH FOR IT – BECAUSE WE HIDE IT. BUT HERE IS THE ANSWER.

    1. Women (females) evolved gossip, rallying, shaming, trading of care-taking, sex and affection, as a means of manipulation (power), by which to gain control over (much) more powerful males.
    2. Women (females) are not loyal to the tribe (males), as they could be easily stolen by one group or another, and have to survive within that group. Female choice arose late (after pairing-off). For much of our evolutionary history, women were property. To no small degree, our domestication of animals by taking over their dominance hierarchy and controlling their reproduction, followed the domestication of women by the same means. (If that isn’t upsetting to your high mindedness little will be.)
    3. Women can (and often did, and still do) bear one man’s offspring at the cost of another man, thereby depriving him of the ability to trade his productivity for sex, affection, care-taking, and offspring. As many as one third of children ‘appear’ to have been the product of ‘sleeping around’. Our understanding of this number will improve over time. Around 70% of women reproduced in history, but only about 30% of men. Our understanding of this number will improve over time. However, men (out of evolutionary necessity) will demonstrate violence over women first and foremost above all other factors. (yes really). The vast majority of male impulsive violence is somehow connected to females. So female ‘wandering’ is the most dangerous to the tribe of any activity including theft and murder.
    4. Women evolved a very short term set of impulses (low risk tolerance) in order to limit their own cellular damage, and to protect the fragility of children that take so many years to mature into self-sufficiency. Women possess less ‘agency’ because of it. Despite our status as super-predators, or apex predators, Humans are frail and especially frail until maturity. Ergo, women ‘feel’ impulsively and cannot suppress their impulses as easily as men can. Nor are social structures to contain women’s impulses as severe as those of males. The reason being that an impulsive woman can be ignored or beaten,while an impulsive male can be sent off to fight or hunt, but may become too dangerous in the tribe or polity.
    5. So, because of high impulsivity, short term bias, the ability to sway men with sex, affection, care-taking, and the ability to sway men with gossip, rallying, and shaming, women were (and still are, to be honest) considered to be ‘troublemakers’.
    6. We tend to think of taming violence among men as the chief achievement of civlization, but that is not what the evidence tells us. It was equally the use of property and marriage to tame women’s gossip, reproduction, and impulsivity that built civilization. Even today, the root cause of central political conflicts is whether (a) women have a ‘right’ to bear children that they cannot create a family or career to support without forcing others to pay for their ‘freedom’, because the only remaining problem facing mankind at present is population. all problems today are reducible to population problems. (b) whether we advance universalism and dysgenia (the female and underclass reproductive strategy), or particularism and eugenia (the male and upper class reproductive strategy).
    7. Western women have always been ‘freer’ that other women, and we are not exactly sure why. It appears that whites are less clannish (at least circumpolar whites, if not anatolian/iranian). Whites have less testosterone than all but east asians. There is some evidence that white female traits were especially desirable and spread quickly through selection and were integrated through selection into white males. There is some evidence that the scarcity of people in the northern climes, the value of ‘others’ in northern climes for survival; the ‘homogeneity’ of the three or four major waves of europeans plus the limited clannishness simply created a less hostile environment for mate selection. (This is the current hypothesis). It will take another generation of work on genetics before we know the answer for certain. But needless to say, whites (at least northerners) are less ‘clannish’ than all other races and sub-races. Conversely, africans, desert, and steppe peoples appear more clannish and more aggressive than far east and far west peoples. This appears to be due to little more than the scale of the underclasses in warm climates. Without selection pressures the median behavior evolves into a general rule.
    8. So history is hard on women because women in fact are (a) physically weaker, (b) emotionally more impulsive and possessed of less agency (weaker), (c) the cause of hidden constant conflict, if not constrained, (d) un-loyal to the tribe.
    9. Education and participation in the work force has done quite a bit to solve women’s impulsivity but women have, since the introduction of socialism, and the feminist movement as a proxy replacement for socialism, worked consistently to vote (a) to destroy the requirement to form a family (corporation for the production of children), prior to bearing offspring, (b) impoverishing men and causing vast increases in suicide through no fault divorce, alimony, and child support, and heavy increases in taxes that consume 100% of the revenues produced by the addition of women to the work force. (c) harm to the ‘tribe’ by making possible the immigration policies since the 1960’s that achieved through underclass immigration what could not be achieved either through advocacy of socialism, or advocacy of feminism.
    10. The West survived the European civil war we call the World Wars. Yet the West will not likely survive the enfranchisement of women without equal investment in the constraint upon women’s behavior that was developed to constrain men’s behavior over the past 10,000 years.
    11. Pandora deserved her reputation. The question is. Men admit their history. Can women admit theirs? History, biology, and evolution are against it.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-are-women-often-portrayed-as-symbol-of-evil-or-weakness

  • Why Are Women Often Portrayed As Symbol Of Evil Or Weakness?

    TRUTH IS VERY OFTEN OFFENSIVE. WHICH IS WHY WE MUST SEARCH FOR IT – BECAUSE WE HIDE IT. BUT HERE IS THE ANSWER.

    1. Women (females) evolved gossip, rallying, shaming, trading of care-taking, sex and affection, as a means of manipulation (power), by which to gain control over (much) more powerful males.
    2. Women (females) are not loyal to the tribe (males), as they could be easily stolen by one group or another, and have to survive within that group. Female choice arose late (after pairing-off). For much of our evolutionary history, women were property. To no small degree, our domestication of animals by taking over their dominance hierarchy and controlling their reproduction, followed the domestication of women by the same means. (If that isn’t upsetting to your high mindedness little will be.)
    3. Women can (and often did, and still do) bear one man’s offspring at the cost of another man, thereby depriving him of the ability to trade his productivity for sex, affection, care-taking, and offspring. As many as one third of children ‘appear’ to have been the product of ‘sleeping around’. Our understanding of this number will improve over time. Around 70% of women reproduced in history, but only about 30% of men. Our understanding of this number will improve over time. However, men (out of evolutionary necessity) will demonstrate violence over women first and foremost above all other factors. (yes really). The vast majority of male impulsive violence is somehow connected to females. So female ‘wandering’ is the most dangerous to the tribe of any activity including theft and murder.
    4. Women evolved a very short term set of impulses (low risk tolerance) in order to limit their own cellular damage, and to protect the fragility of children that take so many years to mature into self-sufficiency. Women possess less ‘agency’ because of it. Despite our status as super-predators, or apex predators, Humans are frail and especially frail until maturity. Ergo, women ‘feel’ impulsively and cannot suppress their impulses as easily as men can. Nor are social structures to contain women’s impulses as severe as those of males. The reason being that an impulsive woman can be ignored or beaten,while an impulsive male can be sent off to fight or hunt, but may become too dangerous in the tribe or polity.
    5. So, because of high impulsivity, short term bias, the ability to sway men with sex, affection, care-taking, and the ability to sway men with gossip, rallying, and shaming, women were (and still are, to be honest) considered to be ‘troublemakers’.
    6. We tend to think of taming violence among men as the chief achievement of civlization, but that is not what the evidence tells us. It was equally the use of property and marriage to tame women’s gossip, reproduction, and impulsivity that built civilization. Even today, the root cause of central political conflicts is whether (a) women have a ‘right’ to bear children that they cannot create a family or career to support without forcing others to pay for their ‘freedom’, because the only remaining problem facing mankind at present is population. all problems today are reducible to population problems. (b) whether we advance universalism and dysgenia (the female and underclass reproductive strategy), or particularism and eugenia (the male and upper class reproductive strategy).
    7. Western women have always been ‘freer’ that other women, and we are not exactly sure why. It appears that whites are less clannish (at least circumpolar whites, if not anatolian/iranian). Whites have less testosterone than all but east asians. There is some evidence that white female traits were especially desirable and spread quickly through selection and were integrated through selection into white males. There is some evidence that the scarcity of people in the northern climes, the value of ‘others’ in northern climes for survival; the ‘homogeneity’ of the three or four major waves of europeans plus the limited clannishness simply created a less hostile environment for mate selection. (This is the current hypothesis). It will take another generation of work on genetics before we know the answer for certain. But needless to say, whites (at least northerners) are less ‘clannish’ than all other races and sub-races. Conversely, africans, desert, and steppe peoples appear more clannish and more aggressive than far east and far west peoples. This appears to be due to little more than the scale of the underclasses in warm climates. Without selection pressures the median behavior evolves into a general rule.
    8. So history is hard on women because women in fact are (a) physically weaker, (b) emotionally more impulsive and possessed of less agency (weaker), (c) the cause of hidden constant conflict, if not constrained, (d) un-loyal to the tribe.
    9. Education and participation in the work force has done quite a bit to solve women’s impulsivity but women have, since the introduction of socialism, and the feminist movement as a proxy replacement for socialism, worked consistently to vote (a) to destroy the requirement to form a family (corporation for the production of children), prior to bearing offspring, (b) impoverishing men and causing vast increases in suicide through no fault divorce, alimony, and child support, and heavy increases in taxes that consume 100% of the revenues produced by the addition of women to the work force. (c) harm to the ‘tribe’ by making possible the immigration policies since the 1960’s that achieved through underclass immigration what could not be achieved either through advocacy of socialism, or advocacy of feminism.
    10. The West survived the European civil war we call the World Wars. Yet the West will not likely survive the enfranchisement of women without equal investment in the constraint upon women’s behavior that was developed to constrain men’s behavior over the past 10,000 years.
    11. Pandora deserved her reputation. The question is. Men admit their history. Can women admit theirs? History, biology, and evolution are against it.

    https://www.quora.com/Why-are-women-often-portrayed-as-symbol-of-evil-or-weakness

  • Education myth: the headstart program: remove the context, remove the demonstrat

    Education myth: the headstart program: remove the context, remove the demonstrated improvements.

    Education myth: put idiots in with exceptionals and they improve. False. Remove the context and restore the natural differences.

    What does all society (markets) do? Sort people by ability.

    What do smart people do? struggle to separate themselves from lesser (more annoying, untrustworthy, accident prone, error-spreading) people.

    People below 90 iq cannot (its just science) make use of democracy, or markets, anything else for that matter. Middle easterners cannot make use of democracy and markets.

    Social pathology takes place in the lower end of the iq scale. And high intelligence is inversely correlated with social pathologies. It’s a linear progression.

    The G-factor (how you process complexity) is not affected by the flynn effect, our white Iq has gone down by 1 standard deviation (15 points) since 1850 according to Nyborg, and Lynn. (I havent asked Flynn).

    It’s really simple. Educational gains whither when exposed to the light of reality. You can harm a child. But you cannot improve him or her. The market seeks truth. Parenting and education are crutches. Once gone the organism reverts to type.

    You want better and smarter children? Less school. Less prepared food. More mom, and exposure to reality. More reading books.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-23 19:16:00 UTC

  • “Libertarian economics is predicted by two factors: high IQ and low Big 5 Agreea

    —“Libertarian economics is predicted by two factors: high IQ and low Big 5 Agreeableness. The so-called Dark Triad are really just a bunch of ways to be low Agreeableness. Psychopathy is just low Agreeableness/low Conscientiousness. Narcissism is low Agreeableness/high Extraversion. Some people are led to libertarian economic positions by extreme smarts, but others just by not giving a tinker’s damn about other people. C’est la vie.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-23 18:54:00 UTC

  • “Our results showed that overall, the use of Facebook was negatively associated

    —“Our results showed that overall, the use of Facebook was negatively associated with well-being. For example, a 1-standard-deviation increase in “likes clicked” (clicking “like” on someone else’s content), “links clicked” (clicking a link to another site or article), or “status updates” (updating one’s own Facebook status) was associated with a decrease of 5%–8% of a standard deviation in self-reported mental health.”—

    Legit.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-23 18:50:00 UTC