Curt Doolittle

Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • I should have included 2a) that explains that predicting is close to doing, so s

    I should have included 2a) that explains that predicting is close to doing, so shopping for women is like watching women for men.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-27 19:29:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640435783076069376

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640371752113958912

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    Q:”CURT: CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE FEMALE MIND?”
    (in a word: ‘prey’. (fear))

    1) OPPORTUNITY: Identification of novelties is easier (requires less skill) for the brain than excellences (requires more skill) -ie: children’s tastes vs adult tastes. (ie: shopping)

    2) CONSUMPTION: The brain identifies novelties that are possible resources for consumption – as such drives our attention to novelties.

    3) HYPERCONSUMPTION: The female brain seeks hyper-consumption for status just as the male seeks hyper-capitalization for status. Acquisition(material loss aversion) and Status(opportunity loss aversion) drive all human priorities.

    4) ATTENTION: The female brain seeks attention because the female brain seeks successful manipulation by the capture of attention, using seduction (from subtle approval to sexual), to acquire hyper-consumption and status.

    5) RESPONSIBILITY EVASION: The female brain fears being wrong, rarely if ever admits error, casts itself as a victim, and avoids responsibility for its instincts, intuitions, and choices at all times. (neurosis)

    6) MAXIMUM UTILITY IN HYPERCONSUMPTION: Novelties, that do not require skill but just basal instincts, offer opportunities for consumption, for hyperconsumption, for status, for attention, for manipulation by seduction, where the female can’t be wrong, produce the greatest incentive available to women (other than defense of her young).

    7) SAFETY: Most women seek safety by maximizing hyperconsumption, hypergamy, social relations, and minimum responsibility, as such they can ‘feel, love, care’ without risk. Why? These traits minimize the risk to her and her offspring. However, in the absence of offspring this becomes what we see as female selfishness and anti-sociality, and in numbers, anti-civilizational warfare (feminism-woke).

    8) NEGATIVE SELECTION: (this might hurt): Men select women by neoteny (fertility, youth, symmetry, gracility, femininity), where women select AGAINST neoteny. In other words, men drive evolution toward human domestication, and women drive evolution toward human primitivization. This is why it’s important to teach women what a ‘good man’ is because otherwise they will ‘race to the bottom’ – at least the vast majority will do so. So again, men created civilization and partly by domesticating women as much as one another.

    That’s about the most accurate description of female behavior you will ever need to understand all female behavior regardless of context.

    Seriously.
    Women are really that simple.
    And yes, men are really wallet objects, and women are really sex objects, and it turns out evolution did that out of necessity. So we develop rituals and myths to romanticize and socialize and institutionalize what is otherwise just physics at work.

    But nature has an inescapable law: “We are not equal and He Who Breeds Wins.”

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1640371752113958912

  • This is study of the measure of difference in brain activity. So I can’t underst

    This is study of the measure of difference in brain activity.
    So I can’t understand what you’re saying.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-27 19:27:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640435342481170440

    Reply addressees: @DBlossius

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640433026730545154

  • You are mistaken. Genes produce phenotypes. All genetic expressions are probabil

    You are mistaken.
    Genes produce phenotypes.
    All genetic expressions are probabilistic.
    All genetic expressions of phenotypes therefore exhibit variation.

    –“In genetics, the phenotype (from Ancient Greek φαίνω (phaínō) ‘to appear, show, shine’, and τύπος (túpos) ‘mark, type’) is the set of observable characteristics or traits of an organism. The term covers the organism’s morphology (physical form and structure), its developmental processes, its biochemical and physiological properties, its behavior, and the products of behavior. An organism’s phenotype results from two basic factors: the expression of an organism’s genetic code (its genotype) and the influence of environmental factors. Both factors may interact, further affecting the phenotype.”–

    Reply addressees: @Axanred

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-27 19:16:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640432731606712321

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640428093230727193

  • You are mistaken. Genes produce phenotypes. All genetic expressions are probabil

    You are mistaken.
    Genes produce phenotypes.
    All genetic expressions are probabilistic.
    All genetic expressions of phenotypes therefore exhibit variation.

    –“In genetics, the phenotype (from Ancient Greek φαίνω (phaínō) ‘to appear, show, shine’, and τύπος (túpos) ‘mark, type’) is the set of observable characteristics or traits of an organism. The term covers the organism’s morphology (physical form and structure), its developmental processes, its biochemical and physiological properties, its behavior, and the products of behavior. An organism’s phenotype results from two basic factors: the expression of an organism’s genetic code (its genotype) and the influence of environmental factors. Both factors may interact, further affecting the phenotype.”–

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-27 19:16:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640432731707285507

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640428093230727193

  • Q: CURT: WHY DO MALE LIBERTARIANS AND CONSERVAITIVES TALK PAST EACH OTHER SO FRE

    Q: CURT: WHY DO MALE LIBERTARIANS AND CONSERVAITIVES TALK PAST EACH OTHER SO FREQUENTLY?
    Pretty simple really.

    1) Masculine systematizing predicts systems (physical), and feminine empathizing predicts emotions (emotional).
    2) Masculine disagreeableness means male systemizing prediction is less affected by search for agreement, and amplifies systematizing.
    3) In the absence of prediction of emotions and indentive for agreement, the male mind has no alternative but projection (presumption), that both parties are working from the same frame of reference.
    4) So we presume others share the same mind, despite that we are more different in mind than feminine, empathizing, agreeables.
    5) And as such we talk past each other.
    6) The same effect is mirrored by the feminine behavior, where they can’t imagine you feel differently than they do and can’t imagine that you think systemically.

    So that means:
    a) the feminine left can almost always understand each other.
    b) The Masculine rights can sometimes understand the feminine left.
    c) But the feminine left can never understand masculine rights.

    WHich is exactly what we see in all aspects of life.

    This is why I teach construction from first principles of the sciences: because everything turns out to be pretty simple if you think through rather than just ‘feel’ or ‘intuit’ differences in human behavior.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-27 18:00:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640413511640596489

  • Q: CURT: WHY DO MALE LIBERTARIANS AND CONSERVAITIVES TALK PAST EACH OTHER SO FRE

    Q: CURT: WHY DO MALE LIBERTARIANS AND CONSERVAITIVES TALK PAST EACH OTHER SO FREQUENTLY?
    Pretty simple really.

    1) Masculine systematizing predicts systems (physical), and feminine empathizing predicts emotions (emotional).
    2) Masculine disagreeableness means male systemizing prediction is less affected by search for agreement, and amplifies systematizing.
    3) In the absence of prediction of emotions and indentive for agreement, the male mind has no alternative but projection (presumption), that both parties are working from the same frame of reference.
    4) So we presume others share the same mind, despite that we are more different in mind than feminine, empathizing, agreeables.
    5) And as such we talk past each other.
    6) The same effect is mirrored by the feminine behavior, where they can’t imagine you feel differently than they do and can’t imagine that you think systemically.

    So that means:
    a) the feminine left can almost always understand each other.
    b) The Masculine rights can sometimes understand the feminine left.
    c) But the feminine left can never understand masculine rights.

    WHich is exactly what we see in all aspects of life.

    This is why I teach construction from first principles of the sciences: because everything turns out to be pretty simple if you think through rather than just ‘feel’ or ‘intuit’ differences in human behavior.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-27 18:00:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640413511435141121

  • There is no disagreement that I know of in the field – only willingness to discu

    There is no disagreement that I know of in the field – only willingness to discuss it. Among the top IQ researchers there is unanimity and there has been for decades now. Among the newer entrants into the field, they fear attacks on their careers and some who I won’t mention have left the field because of it.
    The top lab in the world, run by David Reich, who is the top scholar in the field, and who is clearly biased against this outcome, has been warning the academy, the literate public, and anyone who will listen, that we must come to terms with race differences – because they are substantive.
    It’s not a matter of what I want.
    It’s a matter of failing to produce education and economic policy to compensate for different rates and depths of sexual maturity, the difference in behavior that results, and the form of education necessary because if those factors, and the difference in norms among groups with different intelligence and maturity distributions. Ergo, I want to help people. You want to lie. We know why you want to lie. We know why people who are at the bottom want to lie – status is the most important behavioral incentive among humans – and it determines everything from access to asociation, cooperation, opportunity, consumption, and sexual reproduction. The question is – why does that animal instinct matter?

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-27 17:50:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640411041828880395

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640402708757725207

  • There is no disagreement that I know of in the field – only willingness to discu

    There is no disagreement that I know of in the field – only willingness to discuss it. Among the top IQ researchers there is unanimity and there has been for decades now. Among the newer entrants into the field, they fear attacks on their careers and some who I won’t mention have left the field because of it.
    The top lab in the world, run by David Reich, who is the top scholar in the field, and who is clearly biased against this outcome, has been warning the academy, the literate public, and anyone who will listen, that we must come to terms with race differences – because they are substantive.
    It’s not a matter of what I want.
    It’s a matter of failing to produce education and economic policy to compensate for different rates and depths of sexual maturity, the difference in behavior that results, and the form of education necessary because if those factors, and the difference in norms among groups with different intelligence and maturity distributions. Ergo, I want to help people. You want to lie. We know why you want to lie. We know why people who are at the bottom want to lie – status is the most important behavioral incentive among humans – and it determines everything from access to asociation, cooperation, opportunity, consumption, and sexual reproduction. The question is – why does that animal instinct matter?

    Reply addressees: @TheKesh666

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-27 17:50:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640411041711419393

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640402708757725207

  • Herd effect was really obvious among agreeables. Disagreeables aren’t succeptibl

    Herd effect was really obvious among agreeables.
    Disagreeables aren’t succeptible to herd effects. So we saw the herd effect as evidence of falsehood.
    This is something that the agreeables can’t face.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-27 16:40:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640393448195751936

    Reply addressees: @Halpinius @ratfacedmouse

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640392590918041600

  • It’s just that we’re out of excuses now for race differences in intelligence. An

    It’s just that we’re out of excuses now for race differences in intelligence. And this study is clear and large enough with enough safeguards against bias and outcome determinacy, that there just is no point.
    Race isn’t skin deep. For all intents and purposes we were speciating by geography (continent/climate) until the agrarian revolution. But we are hyper-adaptive including sexually hyper-adaptive so despite morphological differences that would cause other species to resist hybridization, humans are less likely to resist hybridization and continue speciation.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-27 15:53:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640381522854199297

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640376679397834753