Category: Human Behavior and Cognitive Science

  • Hmm. I pay the height penalty so have an average SMV, but status, sorry. Got you

    Hmm. I pay the height penalty so have an average SMV, but status, sorry. Got you there.
    And no you’re just posing. 😉
    Why? I can guess your taste by your word choices. And your taste is primitive. 😉 I won’t explain why.
    It’s ok.
    It’s just genetics.

    So please stop troubling me.…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-10 19:35:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634276901777702915

    Reply addressees: @Ted04536250 @NoahRevoy @schizodove

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634275354390024193

  • (Repost from 2021) THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH (behavioral science

    (Repost from 2021)
    THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH
    (behavioral science via social media: the endless supply of test subjects and zero cost of experimentation.)

    1) The reason I generated so much hate, and was framed as someone with hate, is the result of my exhaustive application of the scientific method. Why? Popper. “Sources of Knowledge and Ignorance”, and Critical Rationalism: research the greatest returns.

    2) What falsehoods contain the greatest opportunity because they provide the greatest source of ignorance: The SACRED and the CONVENTIONAL and the TABOO. So I used exhaustive adversarial falsification of the sacred, conventional, and taboo.

    3) The internet provided a new research opportunity that before was impossible to afford. However, using the internet like using any other method of surveys, relies on self-reporting. Self-reporting is always biased and false. So how do we get people to speak truthfully? Conflict.

    4) So I developed King Of The Hill Games to generate conflict. I would assert statements that would bait people into conflict. And I’d attack the same sacred, convention, or taboo from multiple angles multiple times. This caused moral panic and attracted large numbers of people.

    5) The secret is to ‘exhaust the conversation’ because it is only just before people give up. When they are exhausted. When they are desperate, but still in moral panic, they expose their most reductive -most truthful – intuitions.

    6) The method you use to exhaust their dishonesty, particularly with those in moral panic, who then use GSRRM to disapprove, shame, ad hom, lie, evade, and deny, is to reflect their insult, and then restate the central argument. It’s painfully time-consuming. That’s why it’s hard.

    7) This strategy was extremely successful even among people who understood what I was doing. It also makes people hate you like they (can) hate therapists and (do) prosecutors.

    8) So in one’s search for truth it’s a brutally unpleasant method of circumventing the sacred, conventional, and taboo, in order to discover the first principles that cause us to avoid inquiry into the sacred, conventional, and the taboo. The abyss in the mirror gazes back.

    9) However, as we can see, by eliminating these sources of ignorance, we discover those first principles, that allow us to see what had henceforth been obscured. And in doing so discover how to solve the great problems of the day.

    10) It’s painful. It makes people hate you. It makes people avoid you. But in the end, if you deliver them from evil, by that work, you can often be tolerated if not quite forgiven. 😉

    At least sometimes. 😉

    -Curt Doolittle
    -The Natural Law Institute


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-10 19:33:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634276183360655384

  • (Repost from 2021) THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH (behavioral science

    (Repost from 2021)
    THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH
    (behavioral science via social media: the endless supply of test subjects and zero cost of experimentation.)

    1) The reason I generated so much hate, and was framed as someone with hate, is the result of my exhaustive application of the scientific method. Why? Popper. “Sources of Knowledge and Ignorance”, and Critical Rationalism: research the greatest returns.

    2) What falsehoods contain the greatest opportunity because they provide the greatest source of ignorance: The SACRED and the CONVENTIONAL and the TABOO. So I used exhaustive adversarial falsification of the sacred, conventional, and taboo.

    3) The internet provided a new research opportunity that before was impossible to afford. However, using the internet like using any other method of surveys, relies on self-reporting. Self-reporting is always biased and false. So how do we get people to speak truthfully? Conflict.

    4) So I developed King Of The Hill Games to generate conflict. I would assert statements that would bait people into conflict. And I’d attack the same sacred, convention, or taboo from multiple angles multiple times. This caused moral panic and attracted large numbers of people.

    5) The secret is to ‘exhaust the conversation’ because it is only just before people give up. When they are exhausted. When they are desperate, but still in moral panic, they expose their most reductive -most truthful – intuitions.

    6) The method you use to exhaust their dishonesty, particularly with those in moral panic, who then use GSRRM to disapprove, shame, ad hom, lie, evade, and deny, is to reflect their insult, and then restate the central argument. It’s painfully time-consuming. That’s why it’s hard.

    7) This strategy was extremely successful even among people who understood what I was doing. It also makes people hate you like they (can) hate therapists and (do) prosecutors.

    8) So in one’s search for truth it’s a brutally unpleasant method of circumventing the sacred, conventional, and taboo, in order to discover the first principles that cause us to avoid inquiry into the sacred, conventional, and the taboo. The abyss in the mirror gazes back.

    9) However, as we can see, by eliminating these sources of ignorance, we discover those first principles, that allow us to see what had henceforth been obscured. And in doing so discover how to solve the great problems of the day.

    10) It’s painful. It makes people hate you. It makes people avoid you. But in the end, if you deliver them from evil, by that work, you can often be tolerated if not quite forgiven. 😉

    At least sometimes. 😉

    -Curt Doolittle
    -The Natural Law Institute


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-10 19:33:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634276183108997124

  • Genetic Class. Cultural Class. Social class, Economic class. There is a painfull

    Genetic Class. Cultural Class. Social class, Economic class.
    There is a painfully low correlation between economic class and taste. In fact, it might be a negative indicator. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-10 19:28:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634275123380232192

    Reply addressees: @Ted04536250 @NoahRevoy @schizodove

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634265639450824713

  • Sorry. It’s just math. She’s a 10. Taste does vary by class

    Sorry. It’s just math. She’s a 10.
    Taste does vary by class.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-10 18:50:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634265407631642651

    Reply addressees: @Ted04536250 @NoahRevoy @schizodove

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634260794983456795

  • It’s not a false dichotomy. Because it’s in no small part true. it’s more ‘whole

    It’s not a false dichotomy. Because it’s in no small part true. it’s more ‘whole brain vs left brain’ but the general concept holds under for every single cognitive function.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-10 18:49:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634265160910098438

    Reply addressees: @doczoliday @lindaserg

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634262372280836119

  • Bo, (all); FWIW: Social media is the cheapest means of conducting otherwise impo

    Bo, (all);

    FWIW: Social media is the cheapest means of conducting otherwise impossible tests of how humans signal, negotiate, undermine, deny, deceive, and defraud that’s ever been possible.

    Most of my work on ‘truth’ consists of ‘sciencing’ the logic and grammar of denying, suggestion, deception, lying and fraud, and anti-social, anti-political behavior. And the sex differences in doing so are perhaps one of the greatest contributions to behavioral science in recent years.

    So, it’s no wonder no one has done a significant body of work on ‘human lying’ before I stumbled into it.

    But that says something else about social media:
    Without the threat of a slap or fist in the face – or worse, humans demonstrate behavior they would otherwise report. And humans get away with canceling the otherwise could not.

    Thus solving the problem of social science: surveys are useless. And controlled testing is almost useless. But as we have learned from Economics: demonstrated behavior tells the truth. And social media is the psychological and social science equivalent of the telescope or microscope. And the science(logic) of lying is the behavioral equivalent of the discovery of the calculus.

    Humans are fascinating. At least some insight into behavioral science has been possible because of it.

    -Curt Doolittle
    – The Natural Law Institute


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-10 17:41:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634248240898908167

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634230751041400832

  • Bo, (all); FWIW: Social media is the cheapest means of conducting otherwise impo

    Bo, (all);

    FWIW: Social media is the cheapest means of conducting otherwise impossible tests of how humans signal, negotiate, undermine, deny, deceive, and defraud that’s ever been possible.

    Most of my work on ‘truth’ consists of ‘sciencing’ the logic and grammar of denying, suggestion, deception, lying and fraud, and anti-social, anti-political behavior. And the sex differences in doing so are perhaps one of the greatest contributions to behavioral science in recent years.

    So, it’s no wonder no one has done a significant body of work on ‘human lying’ before I stumbled into it.

    But that says something else about social media:
    Without the threat of a slap or fist in the face – or worse, humans demonstrate behavior they would otherwise report. And humans get away with canceling the otherwise could not.

    Thus solving the problem of social science: surveys are useless. And controlled testing is almost useless. But as we have learned from Economics: demonstrated behavior tells the truth. And social media is the psychological and social science equivalent of the telescope or microscope. And the science(logic) of lying is the behavioral equivalent of the discovery of the calculus.

    Humans are fascinating. At least some insight into behavioral science has been possible because of it.

    -Curt Doolittle
    – The Natural Law Institute

    Reply addressees: @EPoe187


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-10 17:41:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634248240731176960

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634230751041400832

  • SIMPLE REASON FOR CONSISTENCY OF HERITABILITY Simple reason: from *all* papers o

    SIMPLE REASON FOR CONSISTENCY OF HERITABILITY
    Simple reason: from *all* papers over time: Heritability is somewhere between 50 to 80% for the vast majority of complex polygenetic expressions.

    Of that 50-80%, the permutations possible over the past six or more generations are too high to explain, but it’s likely closer to 80% if we could. And the other 20% is due to idiosyncratic natal and post-natal development, amplified by later experience.

    It has to be. Why? Genetics are not mechanical and deterministic but organic and probabilistic. Humans are GROWN. And while that process is easily explainable, it’s a far more complex (incomprehensible) hierarchy of state changes at local and regional cellular levels than we ever imagined. Add oddities like local ‘baiting’ of neural organization to connect neural pathways, and we have the fascinating range of human behavior.

    -Curt Doolittle

    Reply addressees: @datepsych


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-10 17:07:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634239576960057360

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634235814405107712

  • SIMPLE REASON FOR CONSISTENCY OF HERITABILITY Simple reason: from *all* papers o

    SIMPLE REASON FOR CONSISTENCY OF HERITABILITY
    Simple reason: from *all* papers over time: Heritability is somewhere between 50 to 80% for the vast majority of complex polygenetic expressions.

    Of that 50-80%, the permutations possible over the past six or more generations are too high to explain, but it’s likely closer to 80% if we could. And the other 20% is due to idiosyncratic natal and post-natal development, amplified by later experience.

    It has to be. Why? Genetics are not mechanical and deterministic but organic and probabilistic. Humans are GROWN. And while that process is easily explainable, it’s a far more complex (incomprehensible) hierarchy of state changes at local and regional cellular levels than we ever imagined. Add oddities like local ‘baiting’ of neural organization to connect neural pathways, and we have the fascinating range of human behavior.

    -Curt Doolittle


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-10 17:07:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634239577081692173

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1634235814405107712