Wisdom Learned and Wisdom Earned: We Are Self Domesticating https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/30/wisdom-learned-and-wisdom-earned-we-are-self-domesticating/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-30 16:30:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266768916048752641
Jan 10, 2020, 11:02 AM
—“The hardest thing over the last few years I’ve had to come to accept has had to be be the proposition that “we are self-domesticating.” That we must own efforts in every “agent-arena” relationship because no one but us will. For those of us like myself that “wandered through the existential desert”, wasting years of life without guidance, that we must climb near-vertical trajectories. All the while respecting Hanlon’s Razor[1] as you brush arms with others. It’s tough at times. The etiquette and refinement is a lifelong investment. It doesn’t get easier, you just get better. All the while expecting nothing, keeping humility, etc.”— Todd E. Magnusson
Elegant. Honest. Heartfelt. From experience. True. Staying on message: This is the reason we need to teach the stoic method as basic emotional fitness. It provides mindfulness without the need for falsehoods (religion). Realism, Naturalism, Empiricism, Operationalism, Acquisitionism-Propertarianism, Cooperationism, Reciprocity, Reciprocity to our Ancestors, Mindfulness. That is the only ‘True’ Religion we know of.
[1] Hanlon’s Razor: “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.”
Jan 10, 2020, 11:02 AM
—“The hardest thing over the last few years I’ve had to come to accept has had to be be the proposition that “we are self-domesticating.” That we must own efforts in every “agent-arena” relationship because no one but us will. For those of us like myself that “wandered through the existential desert”, wasting years of life without guidance, that we must climb near-vertical trajectories. All the while respecting Hanlon’s Razor[1] as you brush arms with others. It’s tough at times. The etiquette and refinement is a lifelong investment. It doesn’t get easier, you just get better. All the while expecting nothing, keeping humility, etc.”— Todd E. Magnusson
Elegant. Honest. Heartfelt. From experience. True. Staying on message: This is the reason we need to teach the stoic method as basic emotional fitness. It provides mindfulness without the need for falsehoods (religion). Realism, Naturalism, Empiricism, Operationalism, Acquisitionism-Propertarianism, Cooperationism, Reciprocity, Reciprocity to our Ancestors, Mindfulness. That is the only ‘True’ Religion we know of.
[1] Hanlon’s Razor: “Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.”
Parenting https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/30/parenting/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-30 16:29:28 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266768702617391104
Jan 10, 2020, 12:41 PM Again: if parenting was that influential we couldn’t exist. Instead, parents primary control is ONLY who they mate with, and while you can’t make your kids ‘better’ you can do them harm. So in parenting, as in ethics, DO NO WRONG is far more important than trying to do right. Because once they are in the real world they will always and everywhere revert to type – hence why your ancestors and mine sought to give them enough MANNERS to get prestige jobs young. This is how we ‘buy’ positions for our children. The half-life of your parenting is short. Training in Hygiene, Dress, Manners, Diction, Active Listening, Vocabulary, Ethics, Morals, and especially the basics of lists, money, accounting, interest, and contract, help everyone. Because success is caused by conscientiousness (discipline) regardless of intellectual ability. Let me say that again for clarity: Economic returns on intelligence are marginal and economic returns on behavioral training (manners, ethics, morals etc) are exponential. And the importance of Active Listening, Seeking To Understand, Hygiene, Grooming, Dress and Vocabulary, Weightlifting for men and Dancing for Women, and team sports for both cannot be overstated. All those disciplines produce mindfulness. This is counter-intuitive to people but your stress in life is usually determined by your success at training yourself out of impulsivity through rituals, and training in Hygiene, Dress, Manners, Diction, Active Listening, Seeking to Understand, Vocabulary, Ethics, Morals, and especially the basics of list-making, money, accounting, interest, and contract, produce a calm mind far better and more productively than religion or therapy. One’s natural Intellectual ability only grants access to complexity, and marginal increases in income, while conscientiousness and training (above) grant access to opportunity, success, and wealth. Getting kids into ‘good schools’ etc doesn’t improve them it filters them (buys them access). That explains classes. (Uncomfortable truth warning) Different ethnic groups differ largely because of differences in neoteny(rate and depth of maturity) and as such sexual, social, and economic market value – more importantly in the short term, it affects ages for learning different skills. This is why our education system ‘treating us as equal’ is a failure since the most neotenous (east Asians) can learn anything young at the cost of ‘topping out’ young, where less neotenous (Europeans) need more development, and least neotenous afro-Asiatic and Africans more physicality and socialization, before they can be relaxed enough for intellectualization – even so, the Asian method of combining group movements, recitation, and learning are disproportionately more effective than seated classroom work. And seated classroom work is far more effective with lots of slowly incremental rather than short steep increases in difficulty. Girls aren’t ‘getting ahead’ of boys in mixed-gender, mixed-race schools – the schools are damaging boys development of physical movement, planning, and dominance play, making them care nothing about self others or society, and increasing psychosis in girls without a hierarchy of multiple ages to limit behavior and focus emotion on reciprocal training – and we are seeing it play out in all walks of life. Competition socializes. So, tiger moms are buying children access to filters not improving their children (and we see this in the workforce over time). And by not TRAINING in the basics (manners ethics and aggressive competition) that matter most we are creating an infantilized emotional population unfit or not only military service, the workforce, but a political system we call democracy.
Jan 10, 2020, 12:41 PM Again: if parenting was that influential we couldn’t exist. Instead, parents primary control is ONLY who they mate with, and while you can’t make your kids ‘better’ you can do them harm. So in parenting, as in ethics, DO NO WRONG is far more important than trying to do right. Because once they are in the real world they will always and everywhere revert to type – hence why your ancestors and mine sought to give them enough MANNERS to get prestige jobs young. This is how we ‘buy’ positions for our children. The half-life of your parenting is short. Training in Hygiene, Dress, Manners, Diction, Active Listening, Vocabulary, Ethics, Morals, and especially the basics of lists, money, accounting, interest, and contract, help everyone. Because success is caused by conscientiousness (discipline) regardless of intellectual ability. Let me say that again for clarity: Economic returns on intelligence are marginal and economic returns on behavioral training (manners, ethics, morals etc) are exponential. And the importance of Active Listening, Seeking To Understand, Hygiene, Grooming, Dress and Vocabulary, Weightlifting for men and Dancing for Women, and team sports for both cannot be overstated. All those disciplines produce mindfulness. This is counter-intuitive to people but your stress in life is usually determined by your success at training yourself out of impulsivity through rituals, and training in Hygiene, Dress, Manners, Diction, Active Listening, Seeking to Understand, Vocabulary, Ethics, Morals, and especially the basics of list-making, money, accounting, interest, and contract, produce a calm mind far better and more productively than religion or therapy. One’s natural Intellectual ability only grants access to complexity, and marginal increases in income, while conscientiousness and training (above) grant access to opportunity, success, and wealth. Getting kids into ‘good schools’ etc doesn’t improve them it filters them (buys them access). That explains classes. (Uncomfortable truth warning) Different ethnic groups differ largely because of differences in neoteny(rate and depth of maturity) and as such sexual, social, and economic market value – more importantly in the short term, it affects ages for learning different skills. This is why our education system ‘treating us as equal’ is a failure since the most neotenous (east Asians) can learn anything young at the cost of ‘topping out’ young, where less neotenous (Europeans) need more development, and least neotenous afro-Asiatic and Africans more physicality and socialization, before they can be relaxed enough for intellectualization – even so, the Asian method of combining group movements, recitation, and learning are disproportionately more effective than seated classroom work. And seated classroom work is far more effective with lots of slowly incremental rather than short steep increases in difficulty. Girls aren’t ‘getting ahead’ of boys in mixed-gender, mixed-race schools – the schools are damaging boys development of physical movement, planning, and dominance play, making them care nothing about self others or society, and increasing psychosis in girls without a hierarchy of multiple ages to limit behavior and focus emotion on reciprocal training – and we are seeing it play out in all walks of life. Competition socializes. So, tiger moms are buying children access to filters not improving their children (and we see this in the workforce over time). And by not TRAINING in the basics (manners ethics and aggressive competition) that matter most we are creating an infantilized emotional population unfit or not only military service, the workforce, but a political system we call democracy.
Jan 12, 2020, 3:47 PM @charlesmurray
AFAIK, (g) is the most accurate measure in psychology, and stereotypes are the most accurate measure in social sciences. The problem with testing is casting (g) separately from personality traits (which it is), and therefore not ALSO testing for trait-conscientiousness.
2 If we test intelligence, and the Big5 traits we see that success is determined MORE by trait conscientiousness than by intelligence, and that intelligence increases income only because it grants access to problems of greater complexity. Intelligence REDUCES ERROR in complexity.
There are plenty of people who are high in both intelligence, high in conscientiousness, and high in agreeableness and therefore low in competitiveness. So once we stack the priority of these traits in the context of a given economy and rule of law, sortition is obvious.
Furthermore, once we combine all 5/6 traits we see that personalities cluster around three archetypes: female mother(teach), ascendant male(experiment), and established or dominant male(defend).
The world is simple – if and only if you use enough dimensions of measurement.
Jan 12, 2020, 3:47 PM @charlesmurray
AFAIK, (g) is the most accurate measure in psychology, and stereotypes are the most accurate measure in social sciences. The problem with testing is casting (g) separately from personality traits (which it is), and therefore not ALSO testing for trait-conscientiousness.
2 If we test intelligence, and the Big5 traits we see that success is determined MORE by trait conscientiousness than by intelligence, and that intelligence increases income only because it grants access to problems of greater complexity. Intelligence REDUCES ERROR in complexity.
There are plenty of people who are high in both intelligence, high in conscientiousness, and high in agreeableness and therefore low in competitiveness. So once we stack the priority of these traits in the context of a given economy and rule of law, sortition is obvious.
Furthermore, once we combine all 5/6 traits we see that personalities cluster around three archetypes: female mother(teach), ascendant male(experiment), and established or dominant male(defend).
The world is simple – if and only if you use enough dimensions of measurement.
Jan 13, 2020, 3:20 AM What are you talking about? IQ is the most studied, most empirical, most accurate, and most consistent subject in psychology? The 60’s and 70’s were the scientific dark ages as the pseudoscience of marxism and sophistry of postmodernism had their largest affect on soft sciences. We combine IQ with Bi5 we find that the only problem is isolating IQ from the other personality traits. If combined, we find that Conscientiousness almost exclusively determines success, and IQ determines complexity of occupation and degree of error detection. There are 80+ factors but they scale together, with the most dominant being sexual differences in brain organization (F:lateral-general vs M:longitudinal-special), and acquired skills(gc) vs pure ability(gf) – (g) measures how they scale together. We’ve tried every variation with extraordinary experimentation and continuous rotation and adaption to change in vocabulary and knowledge (psychometricians). The result is always the same: everything scales together with (gf) declining with age, and (gc) not (or compensating). Well, that’s because you’re trying to redefine intelligence as other than access to complexity in time. This determines whether we are Helpless, Dim, Uncompetitive, Ordinary, Cunning, Smart, Competitive, Innovative, revolutionary. So demonstrated intel depends upon complex context. The test(s) yield(s) an almost infinite set of numbers. But aside from verbal and spatial-temporal, and the obvious gender bias in that dimension – they all scale together. Thats why they report on the one number (g) and it’s distribution (verbal-spatial). Again, the evidence suggests that by combining intelligence and big5 we would get even higher prediction because, Conscientiousness, Disagreeableness, and Aggressiveness (dominance) or lack of it, explain what IQ does not: how we COMPETE when USING intelligence.
Jan 13, 2020, 3:20 AM What are you talking about? IQ is the most studied, most empirical, most accurate, and most consistent subject in psychology? The 60’s and 70’s were the scientific dark ages as the pseudoscience of marxism and sophistry of postmodernism had their largest affect on soft sciences. We combine IQ with Bi5 we find that the only problem is isolating IQ from the other personality traits. If combined, we find that Conscientiousness almost exclusively determines success, and IQ determines complexity of occupation and degree of error detection. There are 80+ factors but they scale together, with the most dominant being sexual differences in brain organization (F:lateral-general vs M:longitudinal-special), and acquired skills(gc) vs pure ability(gf) – (g) measures how they scale together. We’ve tried every variation with extraordinary experimentation and continuous rotation and adaption to change in vocabulary and knowledge (psychometricians). The result is always the same: everything scales together with (gf) declining with age, and (gc) not (or compensating). Well, that’s because you’re trying to redefine intelligence as other than access to complexity in time. This determines whether we are Helpless, Dim, Uncompetitive, Ordinary, Cunning, Smart, Competitive, Innovative, revolutionary. So demonstrated intel depends upon complex context. The test(s) yield(s) an almost infinite set of numbers. But aside from verbal and spatial-temporal, and the obvious gender bias in that dimension – they all scale together. Thats why they report on the one number (g) and it’s distribution (verbal-spatial). Again, the evidence suggests that by combining intelligence and big5 we would get even higher prediction because, Conscientiousness, Disagreeableness, and Aggressiveness (dominance) or lack of it, explain what IQ does not: how we COMPETE when USING intelligence.