Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • REASONS FOR MALE DEMAND FOR LOWER BODY COUNT (Biases are distributed in both sex

    REASONS FOR MALE DEMAND FOR LOWER BODY COUNT
    (Biases are distributed in both sexes, so we are merely talking about those men who possess this bias)

    Given marriage and divorce are the highest lifetime risk a man experiences:
    1. Differences in the population distribution of the disgust response (disgust, purity, loyalty): STDs but disgust purity and loyalty are all the same emotional foundation, so high body counts violate all three.
    2. Tendency of Male loyalty over time vs Female devotion in time. (Women seek to consume now, men to capitalize over time).
    3. Female status and quality (reputation) are indicative of man’s status and quality, and high body count women are of lower status and value – status and income risk.
    4. Female need for attention(consumption) as cheap stimulation by others, vs productive occupation, socialization, and hobbies, means higher relationship risk.
    5. Accumulated Trauma and, therefore, relationship risk.
    6. Bonding capacity and, therefore, relationship risk.

    Simple version: risk mitigation.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-16 18:44:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669777945999671307

  • Trainer: Improve Fitness Teacher: Improve general knowledge Advisor: Improve som

    Trainer: Improve Fitness
    Teacher: Improve general knowledge
    Advisor: Improve some aspect of life
    Mentor: Improve Occupational Success
    Coach: Achieve Fulfillment
    Therapist: Overcome Emotional Challenges
    Psychologist: Overcome Behavioral Challenges
    Psychiatrist: Overcome Biological…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-16 16:17:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669741033410768897

  • “ON WOMEN: KNOWLEDGE THAT CAN RUIN YOUR DAY” Demonstrated behaviors exist and ar

    “ON WOMEN: KNOWLEDGE THAT CAN RUIN YOUR DAY”
    Demonstrated behaviors exist and are invariant across time and place. Ergo they exist. I don’t have to will them into anything.

    Instead, I, we, all moral people, need only prevent lying – which is what you’re doing. But lying is natural to women because women can’t tell the difference between truth and desirability: it’s the female instinct for the social construction of desirable falsehoods regardless of their correspondence with reality (magical thinking) in order to generate demands from men to satisfy them either directly or indirectly through institutions that they trade for sex, affection, care, and attention, at the minimum cost.

    All female behavior is reducible to this simple algorithm. All female speech is negotiation or posturing to achieve that extraction from men’s production. Which is fine in exchange for reproduction – but that’s largely not happening. Women are just exhausting all possibilities for hyperconsumption and undermining all male attempts to preserve capitalization and the Western advantage of institutionalizing maximum individual responsibility for the benefit of all by reducing common costs for all.

    What Neomarxism, Feminism, and Woke have achieved, is the reversal of twenty five hundred years of western attempt to create intersexual harmony by constraining male aggression and female undermining (particularly sexual), and this is exposing the natural female character when free of those civilizational constraints: and restoring the ancient world’s description of and treatment of women as the source of all sedition and evil. It turns out that men are bad, yes, but women are seditious and evil, and it took thousands of years to reciprocally domesticate each other, largely by religion (which is a feminine institution).

    Be careful what you ask for when you think an equilibrium can be spun to your advantage: there will always be an equal and opposite reaction. And the present one – largely because women are vulnerable to the false promises of the magical thinking of the left, is producing the greatest threat to civilization since the Christian destruction of the ancient world, and the Muslim use of it to destroy the other seven great civilizations of the ancient world, and reduced them to ignorance and decline.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation

    Reply addressees: @theelegantbomb


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-15 18:11:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669407381644558343

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669386580102901760

  • Take it to its causal origins: all female behavior is reducible to the maximizat

    Take it to its causal origins: all female behavior is reducible to the maximization of consumption (including attention, status, resources) at the minimum responsibility for the truth and the commons, whenever there is any potential for conflict that might put any of those resources at risk. Women hide behind the pretense of care, but the origin of the pretense of care is selfish: evasion of responsibility.

    Reply addressees: @OtonielFilho5 @theelegantbomb


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-15 17:58:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669404093788372995

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669403206705717248

  • The truth doesn’t have anything to do with approval. One of the properties of th

    The truth doesn’t have anything to do with approval. One of the properties of the feminine mind, is the confusion (conflation, reversal) of true/false with approval/disapproval. In fact, most women can’t tell the difference whatsoever. Same with NAXALT/AXALT fallacy, and female hyper-consumption and attention seeking vs male capitalization and responsibility seeking.

    Economies, demographics, the universe, nature, and evolution don’t care whether you like laws of the universe or not.

    Reply addressees: @theelegantbomb


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-15 16:21:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669379687796047874

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669362100580360192

  • Earl. (a) there aren’t many, despite our desperate search for them. We can’t fin

    Earl.
    (a) there aren’t many, despite our desperate search for them. We can’t find a single woman that’s theoretical rather than empirical.
    (b) There has been a postwar (really post-1960) decline in scientific thought brought about by the introgression of pseudoscience and ‘mathiness’ (the mathematical equivalent) and we appear to just be coming out of it.
    (c) I’ve done extensive work on civilizational differences in thought – more than any other – by studying civilizational differences in argument and lying. So Europeans aren’t just W.I.E.R.D., we really do think differently. And high trust oddly makes you think differently too. And even so subtle a thing as English language being evolved for law and as such for science has an effect on cognition, and particularly for innovative cognition.
    (d) I can’t verify (yet) if the claims that the northern European gene pool is biased to the autistic end of the spectrum (Systematizing). But we’ll know within a decade or so.
    So pre-war claims that people in different civilizations thought differently were only overstated. They weren’t false. Which… has been surprising to all of us.

    Reply addressees: @MrEarlG @humanfranklin


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-15 00:17:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669136976375697409

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1668053859766337537

  • “Responsibility is a cost, and it’s no wonder people want to evade it. Why someo

    –“Responsibility is a cost, and it’s no wonder people want to evade it. Why someone would accept it at all is more interesting.”– Martin Stepan, @TheAutistocrat

    Referring to the central strategy of Western civilizations’ institutions of cultural production is the institutionalization of individual responsibility for the private and common, thereby creating trust and reducing the costs of existence for all.

    So we gain freedom liberty and sovereignty by paying for it with demonstrated responsibility for the private and common.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-14 19:03:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669058028866289665

  • RT @curtdoolittle: @AlvaroMorono @whatifalthist THE SIMPLE LOGIC OF THE SCIENCE

    RT @curtdoolittle: @AlvaroMorono @whatifalthist THE SIMPLE LOGIC OF THE SCIENCE OF ALL HUMAN BEHAVIOR
    1. All behavior is reducible to the…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-14 16:07:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669013652333109248

  • THE SIMPLE LOGIC OF THE SCIENCE OF ALL HUMAN BEHAVIOR 1. All behavior is reducib

    THE SIMPLE LOGIC OF THE SCIENCE OF ALL HUMAN BEHAVIOR
    1. All behavior is reducible to the spectrum of acquisition: acquisition, retention, conversion, exchange, consumption, and loss aversion.
    2. All sex differences are reducible to differences in responsibility (prey, empathizing, in time) vs (predatory, systematizing, over time)
    3. All individual differences are reducible to the admixture of sex differences and quality of biological(physical) and neurological development (personality and iq).
    4. All individual differences in performance are due to age, environment, and idiosyncratic experience.
    5. All human sexual, social, economic, and political market value (class) is determined by the above.
    6. All human status seeking is simply the search for opportunity discounts on cooperation in various market values.
    7. Because cooperation is so disproportionately productive compared to individual action that survival is all but impossible without it.
    8. Most thought and speech is ‘wayfinding’ negotiation on cooperation on the individual’s terms.
    9. Ergo man evolved to negotiate with humans, not testify about existence.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation

    Reply addressees: @AlvaroMorono @whatifalthist


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-14 16:06:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669013549190922245

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669010065116782593

  • Just the opposite. 😉 But you would need to follow for a bit to understand. Much

    Just the opposite. 😉

    But you would need to follow for a bit to understand.

    Much of my work is in the means of, and sex differences in, human error, bias, fictionalization, deceit, and denial in order to produce a legal test of testifiability (truth claims). This has led me to understand with extraordinary depth the long history of human means of self and other deceptoin. And to catalog in excruciating detail those means.

    Including assertions from ignorance that you’ve just demonstrated. 😉

    Reply addressees: @VMamitsch


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-14 14:57:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1668996110529036288

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1668979616499810313