stoicism: agency-in-toto.
(true. love it.)
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-30 22:44:00 UTC
stoicism: agency-in-toto.
(true. love it.)
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-30 22:44:00 UTC
That is the technique of women: selling their approval. But that era is done. Once men no longer desire it, it’s useless. š
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-30 19:57:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/826157441570205696
Reply addressees: @ThelmzHumphrey
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/826156876199055361
IN REPLY TO:
@ThelmzHumphrey
@curtdoolittle It’s unfortunate you lack emotional intelligence for such a smart guy, but years of masturbation do that to too many men.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/826156876199055361
Women invented gossip, rallying, shaming (denying approval) but we want them. If the left has nothing we want? They’re Powerless!!! #Trump
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-29 16:07:00 UTC
IQ = SCORE/AGE, NOT SCORE/DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE (UNFORTUNATELY)
(from elsewhere)
(a) your test was tragically erroneous. There is no way you have an IQ of 60 because a person with an IQ of 60 cannot compose such sentences or express such ideas.
An IQ score is a RATIO, that takes into account oneās AGE. But what if āageā and āstage of developmentā are very LOOSE measure and intelligence is a very FIXED measure?
(b) childhood tests show oneās stage of development and some of us (particularly those on the autistic spectrum) mature much, much, much more slowly than the rest of society.
(c) IQ tests are absurdly predictive. The problem is – THEY DONāT MEAN ANYTHING UNTIL NORMALIZED FOR STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT INSTEAD OF AGE. Ergo, until youāre mature (say 25ā30) they arenāt āaccurateā.
What we DO FIND is that tests beginning around age 7, if we handle the exceptional differences in the autistic spectrum, are absurdly accurate. With as few as 20 questions we can predict life outcomes. The problem is exceptions not the rule.
(d) Most success in life is determined by i) working hard ii) good manners and grooming, iii) likability, iv) morality. This is what the marketplace for cooperation rewards.
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-29 08:40:00 UTC
—“I need to learn how you think.”—
I don’t feel when I think. I think with time, property, costs, and reserve sympathetic judgement until the end. It’s just like math in that regard.
Whenever I hear ‘feel good’ in an argument, I basically know someone is lying/making an err. So I solve the logic of incentives from A to B on that basis.
When there are no ‘feelings’ involved I know I have found the waypoints. Then I stand back and ask myself how I feel about it. Most people simply cannot develop the mental discipline to think inversely like that.
People are acquisition machines. Our feelings evolved encourage us to acquire. They evolved to reward us for thoughts of acquisition, acts of acquisition, acquisitions, and they evolved to punish us for losses and thoughts of losses. We merely make excuses along the way, because we need to negotiate with our ‘moral selves’ and negotiate with others.
And that is perhaps the best way to look at “The Systems”
System 0 – “acquire evaluation” (brainstem evaluation)
System 1 – “moral evaluation”
System 2 – “search” (memory of experiences)
System 3 – “negotiation” (what we call reason)
We just happen to be able to use our negotiation to reason – with enough practice to circumvent our moral evaluation.
reasoning evolved from negotiation I assume.
This explains (probably) the difference from male and female agency.
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 14:41:00 UTC
We talk to much about SENTIENCE (awareness), and CONSCIOUSNESS (self awareness) and not enough about AGENCY (self determination).
It’s not clear where the line of demarcation is between human an beast. And it appears that the answer is uncomfortable. we can cooperate with those who possess consciousness. But lacking agency are they still fully human?
(very important)
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 09:43:00 UTC
They use feminine arguments: “My approval is desirable, yet I have no argument other than the denial of my approval”.
This is the inverse of our ancient strategy: your approval is undesirable. Your productive exchange is. And if that’s unattainable, your submission is preferable, and failing that, your extermination necessary.
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 09:39:00 UTC
—“It’s amazing that once you spot female shaming it’s really hard to be mad and almost pointless pursuing the argument. So… Don’t get into arguments with women, just love them – and set limits.”—Gary Knight
Never forget how few of us have agency.
The rest are just gene machines capable of language.
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 09:35:00 UTC
****”They’re just gene machines: ‘lie, gossip, rally, shame, and form enough of an irritant that I can get what I want through cost imposition rather than productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchanges.”***
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 09:30:00 UTC
as soon as a boy matures, we must remove him from the influence of women. this has been true for all of history – until ‘the snowflake now’.
Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 08:56:00 UTC