Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • The innate attraction of both sexes is stuck in the neolithic- if not earlier –

    The innate attraction of both sexes is stuck in the neolithic- if not earlier – necessary PRIOR to civilization.

    Male ‘stuck’ selection doesn’t matter because male interests are to accumulate responsibiilty for capital and commons. ergo men are loyal over time.

    Female ‘stuck’ selection does matter because female interests are to avoid responsibiilty for capital and commons. ergo women are devoted in time but not loyal over time.

    Both sexes require ‘training’ to extend their time preferences so that they can form long term stable relationships (corporations, beginning with the family).

    Reply addressees: @thedualMan


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 23:00:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657521178469183488

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657466911503040513

  • RT @WalterIII: MALE HIERARCHY ITSELF IS PART OF THE COMMONS The alpha male belie

    RT @WalterIII: MALE HIERARCHY ITSELF IS PART OF THE COMMONS
    The alpha male believes “commons production” is part of his personal responsib…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 22:40:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657516274455330817

  • Of course. But that doesn’t answer my question of the relationship between the s

    Of course. But that doesn’t answer my question of the relationship between the sexes. So explain similarities and differences pls. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 19:39:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657470519438893059

    Reply addressees: @peanutweanut666

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657468834562056194

  • You might mean that sex differences create an adversarial competition between mi

    You might mean that sex differences create an adversarial competition between mirror interests for the identification of opportunities for reciprocoal cooperation, identifying means of adaptation producing evolutionary computation.

    😉


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 19:31:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657468523273236482

    Reply addressees: @peanutweanut666

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657467368556339201

  • Me too. I’m extremely reluctant to give up putting women on a pedestal. But that

    Me too. I’m extremely reluctant to give up putting women on a pedestal. But that’s partly because I’m a bordeline aspie, and I value women’s intiution into the emotions and minds of others – which at least to me, seems as magical as my logical nonsense seems to them. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 19:19:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657465590523543554

    Reply addressees: @neilmurrayBCE

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657464751381794821

  • RT @curtdoolittle: STRICT CONSTRUCTION OF ALL BEHAVIOR FROM FIRST PRINCIPLES? If

    RT @curtdoolittle: STRICT CONSTRUCTION OF ALL BEHAVIOR FROM FIRST PRINCIPLES?
    If we construct our proofs (arguments) from first principles,…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 19:12:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657463750545358849

  • Yes. Mostly though it’s driven by the institutional lag in suppression of crimin

    Yes. Mostly though it’s driven by the institutional lag in suppression of criminality given that males lead in both positive and negative physical and political, and women follow, in negative social and political. So we could easily suppress female antisocial anti-political and…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 19:11:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657463609889259522

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657462487216791553

  • Really? Do you have a means of falsifying it, becaue all the evidence is that wh

    Really? Do you have a means of falsifying it, becaue all the evidence is that what I stated is correct. I wasn’t severe enough of course, because it’s that mothers are counter productive as children age. But my point was that both parents, and even better, larger extended…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 18:43:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657456491081678849

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657455148980113408

  • “Q: CURT; You often say women don’t chose the right mate if they’re not socializ

    –“Q: CURT; You often say women don’t chose the right mate if they’re not socialized properly. Can you explain that more thoroughly please?”–

    Great question.

    Women are attracted to what they understand as dominance expression (safety). The problem is teaching women what forms of dominance expression (productive competency, demonstrated responsibility) results in the formation or relationships, marriages, families, and successful offspring given the time taken for high investment parenting necessary for the preservation of the returns on high trust for western civilization.

    In the absence of that training, women will follow the most primitive mating impulse that provides the shortest term attention, stimulation, status, and gratification – in other words, female mating instincts are contrary to responsibility because female instincts are contrary to responsibility – until they have children – and only for her children.

    The female instict when not directed to the responsibility for her children leads always and everywhere to saturation of the marketplace with her demand for self image and status seeking by hyperconsumption, hyperattention (also hyperconsumpption) and hypergamy (also hyperconsumption) and the evasion of all responsibility for the commons (also hyperconsumption.)

    So her problem is not falling into seduction by short term dominance expression for reproductive survival in natural selection in absence of male investment, and instead for longer term durability for quality of continuous male investment under civilizational selection (markets). Similar to how men must learn to work, build institutions governments, and armies instead of raid.

    In other words evolution provides women with a fallback instinct in case civilization collapses. But without culture, norms, traditions and institutions, evolution of people within civilization will never survive or evolve within civilization. In other words genetic instinct for survival by natural selection hasn’t caught up with trained intuiition for survival in civilizational selection.

    In other words evolution provides a fallback instinct in case civilization collapses, but without culture, norms, traditions and institutions, evolution of people within civilization will never evolve within civilization.

    In other words genetic instinct for survival by natural selection hasn’t caught up with trained intuiition for survival in civilizational selection.

    So in our current mouse utopia, women are causing civilizational collapse, that exists only because of the disintegration of the traditional (not nuclear) family, labor mobility, the delay of reproduction into the 30s due to education, higher eduction, and employment for the purpose of hyperconsumption.

    The males act accordingly, and as such a few males make only opportunisticaly and not reproductively, and male NEED for responsibility greater than themselves never develops, even if they don’t impose hyperconsumptive costs on the commons.

    We are dying for the same reason mice do in mouse utopia.

    Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 18:16:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657449756635873283

  • STRICT CONSTRUCTION OF ALL BEHAVIOR FROM FIRST PRINCIPLES? If we construct our p

    STRICT CONSTRUCTION OF ALL BEHAVIOR FROM FIRST PRINCIPLES?
    If we construct our proofs (arguments) from first principles, then those properties we use to describe causality are consistent across the physical, biological, sentient, cooperative, and institutionally cooperative scales.

    It’s this consistency across domains that falsifies false, and half-truth claims that cause error, bias, or deceit by suggestion, association, inference, deduction.

    This is why we work with such precise terms in P-Law: Every word we use we define as an ordinal measure of a spectrum (dimensions), constructed from first principles that survive falsification by tests of consistency across domains, forming and equilibrium between limits, between (-)demand, (=) persistence, (+) supply, and (!=) collapse.

    It’s not obvious to readers or even those following us that everything we say is constructed from the first principle of differences in charge that equilibrate sufficiently sustainable energy capture to resist decay back into the quantum background – and from there into entropy by expansion of space.

    We’re just as strictly constructing our proofs as math, but by ordinal rather than cardinal terms, specifically because cardinality isn’t a meaningful measure when there is no reducible quantity, only triangulation of more than less than equal to(marginally indifferent) and not equal to(marginally different).


    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 15:00:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657400397517017094