Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • Liberals operate on sentiment not reason. Lies that justify sentiments are ‘true

    Liberals operate on sentiment not reason. Lies that justify sentiments are ‘true’ for them.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-29 20:13:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/814564949779447808

    Reply addressees: @AlHernandez21

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/814562276028153857


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/814562276028153857

  • ECONOMICS OF SEX (not sure who shared this with me again yesterday, but even tho

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToS4zoYcJnk&feature=youtu.beTHE ECONOMICS OF SEX

    (not sure who shared this with me again yesterday, but even though it’s made the rounds, it’s one of those bits that’s durable.)


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-29 13:09:00 UTC

  • Men: task specialists, moral generalists. Women: moral specialists, task general

    Men: task specialists, moral generalists. Women: moral specialists, task generalists.

    Fascinating.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-24 15:09:00 UTC

  • NO ARISTOCRACY OF EVERYONE, NOR SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT FOR EVERYONE. I think we need

    NO ARISTOCRACY OF EVERYONE, NOR SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT FOR EVERYONE.

    I think we need to give up on the hope that all people can be taught to think as we call ‘scientifically’ for the simple reason that as we dip below 105, the challenge becomes insurmountable.

    If we had the IQ of every person quoted or tested I think we would tend to have a much clearer view of ‘what people think’.

    We definitely have a spectrum that starts with neuroticism, progresses through paranoia, graduates to conspiracy theory, and matures in to schizophrenia – and its not an insignificant portion of the population.

    We definitely have a spectrum that starts with sensitive, progresses through solipsism, and matures into solipsistic paranoia.

    We definitely have a spectrum from needy, to extroversion, to balance, to introversion, to disconnected/withdrawn.

    These three traits TEND to run in families and are only mediated by familial cohesion (indoctrination).

    When I see quotes like this article, what I see is the “I am average” fallacy. If we had IQ markers along with our opinions then it would be a lot harder for pseudo-academics, and pseudo-intellectuals, to use SUGGESTION to deceive us by appealing to “i am average” or ‘most people are like me’.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-19 12:20:00 UTC

  • Humans are very simple creatures. The mind operates by very predictable means, b

    Humans are very simple creatures. The mind operates by very predictable means, by very clear incentives. It’s the layer cake of justificatinos, excuses,lies we tell ourselves and each other that make it possible.

    We need to achieve a certain state. We attempt to achieve that state by the means available to us, and the techniques available to us.

    Why? Because most of us are uncompetitive, average, nothings, or worse, and we need a means of feeling like we’re winning or succeeding that is a game rather than a problem. Everyone tries to invent a signal-game of some sort because so little of what we do is meaningful to anyone other than ourselves.

    This used to be obtained through spiritualism of one form or another. But with the fall of religion we see secular people searching for all sorts of excuses to achieve the same ends by other means.

    It’s ok. It’s like breathing. We gotta do it. – Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-18 21:20:00 UTC

  • Living in a house with other men, and hiring a housekeeper/cook is cheaper and m

    Living in a house with other men, and hiring a housekeeper/cook is cheaper and more satisfying than living in a house with a woman that is less than a constant joy.

    Thankfully, aside from being soft and smelling good, there are a lot of women to live with that are a constant joy. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-13 09:35:00 UTC

  • ***When someone accuses you of moral relativism, what they mean is not relative

    ***When someone accuses you of moral relativism, what they mean is not relative but meritocratic. So respond with DYSGENIC absolute equality, and EUGENIC absolute meritocracy.***

    There is nothing relative about it. Both eugenic and dysgenic moral rules are absolutes. It’s whether we lie about the value of the underclasses or not.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-11 16:46:00 UTC

  • “Would you classify your views on human beings and cooperation as pessimistic?”-

    —“Would you classify your views on human beings and cooperation as pessimistic?”— Roy Van de Weteringh

    That would require me to believe in a fallacy that humans had a bias other than rational. So I view humans as rational machines that can be configured by experience to act optimistically or pessimistically.

    🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-11 13:27:00 UTC

  • Stoicism as a response to increase in scale.

    (by James Augustus Berens ) JA BERENS ON STOICISM AND SCALE —“Stoicism functions as a tool for limiting the scope of human cognitive processes (cognition & responses to perceived changes in state) to the consequential (actionable at individual scale). The scope of man’s cognitive processes evolved under tribal/local scale with limited complexity. Under more complex systems, like those of post-industrial societies, information surpasses the scale of individual actionability, yet because of our innate cognitive biases we respond to, perceive and approach information as if it were consequential.

    Complexity and the [perceived] randomness of events eliminate the feedback/information man receives from his actions. That is, as complexity increases, the difficulty of calculating the consequences of a given action or set of actions increases. Thus the need for stoicism as a mental instrument for goal-directed action in an increasingly complex world. It is no surprise, then, that much in the way that Doolittle and Taleb attack pseudoscience via operationalism and probability theory, respectively, we see a resurgence of stoicism guided by operational and probabilistic thinking. In respect to the former, we decrease uncertainty and launder our thoughts of error, bias, [self] deceit and wishful thinking; and, in respect to the latter, under uncertainty, through the investment and coordination of action to produce a convexity of returns/results (anti-fragility): investment in portfolios with limited down side and unlimited upside.”— James Augustus Berens SAME PROBLEM FACING THE GREEKS. Scale
  • Stoicism as a response to increase in scale.

    (by James Augustus Berens ) JA BERENS ON STOICISM AND SCALE —“Stoicism functions as a tool for limiting the scope of human cognitive processes (cognition & responses to perceived changes in state) to the consequential (actionable at individual scale). The scope of man’s cognitive processes evolved under tribal/local scale with limited complexity. Under more complex systems, like those of post-industrial societies, information surpasses the scale of individual actionability, yet because of our innate cognitive biases we respond to, perceive and approach information as if it were consequential.

    Complexity and the [perceived] randomness of events eliminate the feedback/information man receives from his actions. That is, as complexity increases, the difficulty of calculating the consequences of a given action or set of actions increases. Thus the need for stoicism as a mental instrument for goal-directed action in an increasingly complex world. It is no surprise, then, that much in the way that Doolittle and Taleb attack pseudoscience via operationalism and probability theory, respectively, we see a resurgence of stoicism guided by operational and probabilistic thinking. In respect to the former, we decrease uncertainty and launder our thoughts of error, bias, [self] deceit and wishful thinking; and, in respect to the latter, under uncertainty, through the investment and coordination of action to produce a convexity of returns/results (anti-fragility): investment in portfolios with limited down side and unlimited upside.”— James Augustus Berens SAME PROBLEM FACING THE GREEKS. Scale