Curt Doolittle

Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • PATHOLOGICAL ALTRUISM: A CATASTROPHIC GENETIC DEFECT. We can go through our gene

    PATHOLOGICAL ALTRUISM: A CATASTROPHIC GENETIC DEFECT.

    We can go through our genetic strengths, and those of other races. We can go through the weaknesses of other races. But we fail to answer our one genetic defect that is jus as important as verbal IQ, spatial IQ, Impulsivity, or physical durability: our two sided sword of altruism.

    We will grant trust first to anyone, before they earn it. And we are less sensitive to outsiders than any other group.

    For these reasons, while we once ranged from Ireland to Egypt, to Mongolia, our people are now pressed up against the polar climes. We cannot defend ourselves from our own cognitive limitations. Our evolution failed us. We lack sufficient fear of outsiders to compete with the groups that take advantage of our lack of fear of outsiders to colonize and conquer us. Worse, our elites have turned on us, and in the name of corporate governance, universalism, and progressivism, sell off our ancient history, and our entire tribe in exchange for early retirement and the self gratifying status signal that they are conducting charity rather than reverse colonialism.

    Enough.

    We come first.

    Those of us without the genetic defect must defend our tribe from its own illness.

    (Yeah. I like that one. That’s got legs.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-31 15:49:00 UTC

  • NO. I DON”T NEED TO SOLVE IT. MACDONALD DID: ALTRUISM, GUILT, AND ALTRUISTIC PUN

    NO. I DON”T NEED TO SOLVE IT. MACDONALD DID: ALTRUISM, GUILT, AND ALTRUISTIC PUNISHMENT

    The reason I didn’t buy it the first time around is because he places a lot of emphasis on genetic tendency and I tend to treat such things as neutral, and to look for information-based (normative and metaphysical) causes to behavior first.

    While there are clear genetic differences in behavior between our tribes, I tend to look for normative answers not genetic ones. Usually they walk hand-in-hand.

    BUT I DO NEED TO DEFEND AGAINST IT.

    1) All Groups Must Act In Self Interest.

    2) Cooperation is preferable to parasitism, is preferable to conquest, is preferable to extermination. And if we cannot engage in cooperation, you may NOT engage in parasitism, conquest or extermination.

    3) No Guilt Ever. (Nor colonialism). Speak Truthfully. No Guilt.

    4) The world cannot adopt our civilization, whether genetic, normative or both.

    5) We cannot tolerate excessive dilution of our civilization, whether genetic normative or both.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-31 00:52:00 UTC

  • (ASPIE STORIES: I swear to god, sometimes I feel like a mere puppet to the machi

    (ASPIE STORIES: I swear to god, sometimes I feel like a mere puppet to the machine in my head. I can’t figure out what’s bothering me all day and then my subconscious throws out the answer to something that it’s been frustrated with that it couldn’t solve, that I didn’t even know it was solving, and boom, I’m happy and I have no idea why. ack…. Nature’s Useful OCD disorder. lol. )

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-30 08:20:00 UTC

  • FORBIDS WOMEN IN COMBAT —“Israel just forbade women in combat, but don’t expec

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10548629/US-Marines-postpone-fitness-rule-after-most-female-recruits-fail-to-do-three-pull-ups.htmlISRAEL FORBIDS WOMEN IN COMBAT

    —“Israel just forbade women in combat, but don’t expect much wailing on the part of the press. On the other hand, were we to do it…”—

    Duh. All it does is get men killed.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-29 06:20:00 UTC

  • DYSGENIA : BIRTH RATES Small things in large numbers have vast consequences. Wou

    http://jaymans.wordpress.com/2014/07/28/idiocracy-can-wait/AMERICAN DYSGENIA : BIRTH RATES

    Small things in large numbers have vast consequences. Would you rather keep a 106IQ economy employed or a 90IQ economy employed? At what point do you not have enough people to voluntarily organize production in relation to those who can only participate in production, to those who cannot participate in production?

    You can’t use 20th century history as a benchmark, unless you include the rest of the world’s poverty, ignorance, and backwardness in you analysis. Because labor pools are rebalancing and they will continue to. And the upper class won’t be those people that hold land. It will be those people who are employable in the organization of production.

    Now, in Propertarianism I have an answer for this problem, but only if we limit dysgenic reproduction to one child. Otherwise, in the end, we still lose.

    Because there has to be a reason for a minority to organize production.

    Let that sink in a bit.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-29 04:55:00 UTC

  • “A man likes her body. A woman likes his brain. Everybody f__k’s what they like

    —“A man likes her body. A woman likes his brain. Everybody f__k’s what they like most.”— Ukrainian Proverb.

    Like everything else here, its painfully true. 🙂

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-28 03:51:00 UTC

  • Sure. Math may be the key to the universe. But don’t let that fool you. Micro ec

    Sure. Math may be the key to the universe. But don’t let that fool you. Micro economics are the key to man. Hydrogen doesn’t try to outsmart anyone. We do.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-27 16:45:00 UTC

  • Evolutionary Strategies (Differences in Trust)

    The problem I have with this table, is that I’m not sure that the european side is true. Because hunter-gatherer and cattle-raider are two different things. And I think our unique ethic comes from cattle raiding.

    10525555_10152606561972264_4001175707690834129_n

  • Evolutionary Strategies (Differences in Trust)

    The problem I have with this table, is that I’m not sure that the european side is true. Because hunter-gatherer and cattle-raider are two different things. And I think our unique ethic comes from cattle raiding.

    10525555_10152606561972264_4001175707690834129_n

  • Psychology… Am I the only person who self-anchors when speaking? I don’t like

    Psychology…

    Am I the only person who self-anchors when speaking? I don’t like to say certain things because it anchors my thinking, whereas I don’t anchor if I don’t speak it.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-07-26 05:21:00 UTC