Curt Doolittle

Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • I know hollywood and the fashion media were trying to ‘internationalize’ beauty

    I know hollywood and the fashion media were trying to ‘internationalize’ beauty a bit, and are now they’re trying ‘odd’ looks in order to further downmarket to the emerging prole market. Marketing chases those spending on signals and the prole market is now the big source of cheap volume signal revenue.

    But I mean once you’ve seen Anita Ekberg, Grace Kelly, Ann Margaret, Brooke Shields, Charlize Theron, and for good measure, Monica Bellucci, and realize it’s all the math of genetic symmetry, being raised well, and the brains to use what god gave you.

    Now, personally, I go for the more diminutive jaw lines: Hepburn, Sophie Marceau, Megan Fox kinda thing. But I know that’s preference not fact.

    Beauty is a science.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-17 13:34:00 UTC

  • EUGENICS: FAILURES CANNOT BE UNDONE *Dollo’s law — “An organism is unable to ret

    EUGENICS: FAILURES CANNOT BE UNDONE

    *Dollo’s law — “An organism is unable to return, even partially, to a previous stage already realized in the ranks of its ancestors.”

    Simply put this law states that evolution is not reversible.

    That is why you protect your own.

    1 – Knowledge cannot be unknown.

    2 – Actions cannot be undone.

    3 – Genes cannot be restored.

    4 – Time cannot be reversed.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-17 06:17:00 UTC

  • WITTGENSTEIN AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE INTELLECTUAL CONSEQUENCES OF VARIATIONS IN SEX

    WITTGENSTEIN AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE INTELLECTUAL CONSEQUENCES OF VARIATIONS IN SEXUAL DIMORPHISM

    I might like to add this idea to the Wittgenstein criticism:

    His work (nominalism in general) is a further example of the tendency of feminine thought – an intellectual form of solipsism, in which meaning rather than emotions constitute reality.

    When I make the exaggerated claim that ‘all jews are female’ I do so because this tendency to treat meaning as existential is dominant throughout jewish thought as engineering is dominant in western thought, and as emotion is dominant in female thought.

    once you grasp this you can see the consistent pattern in jewish (feminine) cosmopolitan thought, in german (rationalist) thought, in anglo moral thought, and in american procedural thought, and in engineering versus religion in general.

    This is why popper stumbled upon the idea (falsification) but failed – he was a verbalist. This is why Kant stumbled about the solution but failed – religious verbalism. This is why Locke/smith/hume stumbled upon but could not solve it – moralism. This is why jefferson stumbled on the solution but failed – legalism, …

    We can’t escape our frames. Our cultural group evolutionary strategies are certainly programmed into us over time – the only question is how much of that programming has been reduced to genetics – or at least distributions of genetic preferences.

    This is a profound problem. Which is why truthful speech is as important in philosophical, political and economic discourse as it is in the sciences.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-16 05:18:00 UTC

  • OUR INEQUALITY AND EQUALITY Men and women are compatible in a division of percep

    OUR INEQUALITY AND EQUALITY

    Men and women are compatible in a division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy. We are not equal. We are not altogether that similar. And in many ways we are opposites. We live not so much as individuals as ‘parts’ that work together. Individualism determines the rate of economic cooperation, and the quality of the law’s resolution of conflicts. It does not on the other hand mean we are in any way equal. Why? Because we are equal in contract if unequal in perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy.

    Cooperation (contract) is a matter of equality since we must constantly prevent one another from engaging in parasitism. But it is the process of cooperation that is equal, not the individuals who participate in it.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-16 02:26:00 UTC

  • Flip it. Given that density is a dysgenic IQ sink, why would we want to encourag

    Flip it. Given that density is a dysgenic IQ sink, why would we want to encourage rotation?

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-15 20:03:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731937969381224448

    Reply addressees: @Noahpinion

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731934059979411456

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Noahpinion

    @curtdoolittle Shouldn’t risky investing be risky?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/731934059979411456

  • WOMEN IN UKRAINE: WEAK vs FREE? (cultural observations) Its sad. When you finall

    WOMEN IN UKRAINE: WEAK vs FREE?

    (cultural observations)

    Its sad. When you finally realize that all the women here are beautiful, feminine, lacking western women’s near universal feminism induced insanity, but almost universally ‘broken’. And broken so much so that the only thing that they can love with any certainty and safety is their children. They describe this feeling of loving as ‘weak’. That they want to ‘feel weak’. They want to be safe enough to feel ‘weak’. And I am kind of emotionally stupid so I didn’t understand it really. Why would you consider being emotionally available, and therefore emotionally vulnerable as ‘weak’, rather than ‘free’? Unless that is, you perceive yourself in a low trust world of constant risk and threat.

    It’s freaking sad.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-15 16:01:00 UTC

  • SMALL THINGS MATTER We make many hundreds if not thousands of decisions every da

    SMALL THINGS MATTER

    We make many hundreds if not thousands of decisions every day, and the cumulative effect of those many small decisions is usually more influential than the effect of our larger decisions.

    this is the central problem with running increasingly large organizations: providing a means of decidability for the many little decisions that people make every day.

    In Good To Great, the author reduces this problem to having a ‘strategy’ that is very simple. It provides a method of decidability to everyone in the company so that many zillions of little decisions accumulate in the production of the organizations competitive strategy in the market.

    Unfortunately, a disproportionate number of our decisions are made in theoretical rather than empirical context. In particular, those that require we influence others (customers and co workers). This influence requires local knowlege that is not really open to generalization.

    One of the cool features of software is that if you organize your business process into workflows you can control a lot of those small decisions.

    The opposite problem occurs when the local phenomenon (the interpersonal actions) more more significant in influencing a decision by peer, manager or customer than are the facts.

    Why? because the marginal difference between suppliers (merchants) forces prices to neurality, leaving non-price matters the reason for decisions. Ergo, talent and customer service and knowledge of particular businesses tends to be more influential in business relations and product signaling value more influential in consumer relations.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-13 06:17:00 UTC

  • THE UNDERSTANDABLE ORIGINS OF JUSTIFICATIONISM We evolved justificationary argum

    THE UNDERSTANDABLE ORIGINS OF JUSTIFICATIONISM

    We evolved justificationary argument for a set of understandable reasons:

    0) Our memories evolved to repeat what succeeded in the past.

    1) We learned to observe one another, then teach one another by imitation.

    2) It’s far less expensive to describe a route from problem to solution, rather than compare all alternative routes.

    3) Moral and legal rules are contractual, and as such at least lightly axiomatic, and therefore justificationary: “i did this because I though it ok to do this in our group”.

    4) Mathematics evolved prior to science, and as the most simple form of logic, it is the logical discipline in which the method of exploration and the method of proof (justification) are operationally nearly identical. Mathematics appeared to be justificationary because of this limited difference between exploration and proof.

    So between the evolutionary results of memory, learning through imitation, the economic demands of thought, moral justification, and mathematica justification, we continued the trend attempting to make truth justificationary.

    But truth is not constrained by our costs of finding it, the limits of our memories, the difficulty in transmitting it, and our moral appreciation for it.

    Truth is what it is precisely because it is not bounded by human limits.

    Truth is that description which both provides us with a recipe that consistently produces an existential result within a set of limits, and survives all attempts at falsification within those limits.

    Limits are significant, since professing the existential possibility of a perfect, complete, most parsimonious truth is in itself a logical impossibility. Parsimony depends upon the limits of the mind.

    So more parsimonious truths may be possible on any subject, but there are not more parsimonious truths within the limit of the claims we make.

    Limits are how we remove platonism – mysticism – from the art of truth telling. This remains a fallacy within critical rationalism that operationalism – the test of existential possibility – assists us in correcting.

    This process Re-Aryanizes “Truth” into testimony. And all the rest that we do not know is merely unknown information yet to be discovered or invented.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-12 04:47:00 UTC

  • the iq data that you need to know

    https://randomcriticalanalysis.wordpress.com/2016/05/09/my-response-to-the-nytimes-article-on-school-districts-test-scores-and-income/All the iq data that you need to know.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-10 15:08:00 UTC

  • on sexual development. Education not just by gender but by race. Why? Different

    http://blog.jim.com/culture/adulthood-by-race/More on sexual development.

    Education not just by gender but by race. Why? Different rates of maturity, and different degrees of maturity.

    Again I see racial differences as largely one of endocrines, sexual maturity and sexual dimorphism.

    The way you grow a human creates the behavioral differences

    We are not machines that are manufactured but organisms that are grown.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-10 12:16:00 UTC