Curt Doolittle

Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • Both east asians and westerners have systematically selected for more ‘feminine’

    Both east asians and westerners have systematically selected for more ‘feminine’ traits, largely through the higher reproduction of more ‘immature’ looking women. (Why this was possible I am not sure.)

    The east asians seem to have selected for immaturity (pedomorphism) to a point where it’s been somewhat destructive. It appears that despite such selection to a lesser degree, we might have also.

    But that those groups that do not select as such (and still aggressively herd women as possessions) have not.

    This is one of those ‘uncomfortable truths’.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-10 21:36:00 UTC

  • ***The only substantial differences between the races that I have uncovered is v

    ***The only substantial differences between the races that I have uncovered is verbal acuity achieved by the process of reduction of gender dimorphism through reproductive selection, and reduction in impulsivity achieved by the process of pedomorphic reproductive selection, the demand for rational intertemporal planning caused by cold climate agrarianism, the upward redistribution of consumption and reproduction to the middle and upper classes under various forms of manorialism, and the consistent culling of the lower classes by war, famine, disease, and aggressive hanging or murder of the criminal.***

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-10 20:50:00 UTC

  • ***i’m saying that the needs of children are why women lack agency in favor of i

    ***i’m saying that the needs of children are why women lack agency in favor of impulsivity in matters of empathy and sympathy. And that the burden of children ‘equalizes’ those impulses as a woman has two or three or more of them. Women become conservative quite quickly when they have many children. Some women do not need children in order to overcome their impulsivity in matters of empathy. And therefore some women are conservative even prior to marriage and offspring. ***

    Women vote right when they’re married with children. It’s self interest. THey vote left when single or single with children. It’s self interest.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-10 15:36:00 UTC

  • Stoicism. Action without care for opinion

    Stoicism. Action without care for opinion.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-08 20:36:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/829428773011521543

    Reply addressees: @cg_mischling

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/829400681878474756

    IN REPLY TO:

    @cg_mischling

    @curtdoolittle Taoism: action though inaction

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/829400681878474756

  • um…. lets be clear. the Dunning Kruger effect occurs when one perceives that a

    um…. lets be clear. the Dunning Kruger effect occurs when one perceives that a little general knowledge of a subject allows one to made deductions in that subject matter. This turns out to be false. Meanwhile people who excel in a subject matter tend to be overly pessimistic about their knowledge because they understand the broad opportunity for error.

    Smart people (actually, just educated people) tend to make these errors more often then ordinary (uneducated ) people. For the simple reason that uneducated people give themselves the excuse of saying “well I don’t know enough about that”.

    Smart people simply say “I’m not sure I know very much about that”. or they say ‘I can hazard a guess but that’s the best I can do.” Thats how you tell someone is smart. lol

    What we see in specialists (economics in particular), is that expertise in one domain is not transferrable to another domain.

    What we see in ethics, morals, politics, economics, and group evolutionary strategy, is that EVERYONE over-estimates his opinion pretty much except the synthetic historians, since they are the only people who specialize in what man has done, rather than what they think he ought to, or what he wants to.

    The reason being that we have greater investment in ethics, morals politics etc, and greater investment in our specializations, that we do in other subject matter.

    Propertarianism and testimonialism make it much harder to be the victim of DK cognitive bias, becuase we have too many hurdles to overcome before we can say “yeah, this is a truth candidate”. It’s not that we are less biased, it is that it is just really hard to ‘do the operational math’ so to speak. Because if you cna’t do it you can’t claim you know it.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-08 19:51:00 UTC

  • “Children are not proof of reproductive success. Grandchildren are.”— Con Eli

    —“Children are not proof of reproductive success. Grandchildren are.”— Con Eli Khan

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-08 11:00:00 UTC

  • “We can save men ten years of lost lifetime productivity if we can deprogram the

    —“We can save men ten years of lost lifetime productivity if we can deprogram them.”– Moritz Bierling

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-07 07:45:00 UTC

  • The hairless apes are out of the cage and flinging digital feces everywhere

    The hairless apes are out of the cage and flinging digital feces everywhere.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-06 12:40:00 UTC

  • FOR WHAT IS GOSSIP BUT AN ATTEMPT TO DECREASE TRUST? —“As for the proximate ca

    FOR WHAT IS GOSSIP BUT AN ATTEMPT TO DECREASE TRUST?

    —“As for the proximate cause—progressivism—yes, the left’s actions do tend produce states contrary to their stated goals.

    Ultimately they seek power. And so increasing conflict and decreasing trust produces demand for the state and discretionary legislation, which they are more than happy to supply.

    However profitable that may be in the short-run, it is not a stable model, and appears that we are approaching the limits of the function”— James Augustus Berens

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-01 15:35:00 UTC

  • SERIES: Hierarchy of sympathies: 1 – condition (empathy – condition sympathy) “i

    SERIES:

    Hierarchy of sympathies:

    1 – condition (empathy – condition sympathy) “i can sense/experience your feelings”

    … 2 – imitation (action sympathy)

    … … 3 – intention ( intention sympathy)

    THE LESSON; Whenever you use a term:

    (a) can you place it in a series, so that you know you aren’t conflating?

    (b) can you narrate how the state you’re describing or naming came into existence? Or are you conflating imagination (fantasy) with possibility(existence).

    (c) are the references to all your terms consistent in existential grammar? Meaning: are they all in operational language, and if not, are they in observational, are if not are they in experiential, and if not, are they in intentional? How do you know you aren’t conflating forms of existence?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-01 15:15:00 UTC