Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • We are all involuntary carriers of the metaphysical presumptions of our group st

    We are all involuntary carriers of the metaphysical presumptions of our group strategy, the myths, traditions, norms, and institutions that propagate it.
    Example: whatever crops your ancestors farmed four centuries ago most likely still persists in your family moral intuitions.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-01 22:19:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1620909657035522052

    Reply addressees: @SevernDarden @TheAutistocrat @jamesfoxhiggins @JohnGalt2727

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1620909012626579456

  • The problem’s the term ‘the science’. For ‘adults’ in the room, it means ‘settle

    The problem’s the term ‘the science’. For ‘adults’ in the room, it means ‘settled science’: survival by competition for falsification in the market for applied science. For the ‘children’ in the room it means some ‘scientist’ (funding-seeking accredited midwit) published a paper.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-01-21 21:00:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616903460519305216

    Reply addressees: @GonzaloLira1968

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616902475667193859

  • The question of group selection consists largely of people talking past each oth

    The question of group selection consists largely of people talking past each other. Even if selection occurs at the individual level the biases in selection are shared at the group level. Even attractiveness was variable prior to photography and mass media. Now it’s converging.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-01-21 20:36:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616897458302513153

    Reply addressees: @TOOEdit @normiecore @ImATennisBall @zagrebbi @RukhsanaSukhan @nathancofnas

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1616892353259921408

  • Legal reforms lag, and institutional reforms lag even more. And AFAIK the marxis

    Legal reforms lag, and institutional reforms lag even more. And AFAIK the marxist-to-feminist-to-woke counter-revolution against Darwin-Spencer, consists of blaming males via a false oppression narrative for the laws of the universe, and western civ for most reflecting them.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-01-12 09:53:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1613474273925939200

    Reply addressees: @jordanbpeterson

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1613471596865363968

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @jordanbpeterson JP: I’m not quite sure how female neuroticism, magical thinking, and projection, result in imaginary models of the world, and what can be done about it if anything, when the behavior is so pervasive that we can destroy a civ from within by the mass distribution of their ‘gossip’.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1613471596865363968

  • I rec’v lots of criticism for emphasis on female cognitive immaturity in the abs

    I rec’v lots of criticism for emphasis on female cognitive immaturity in the absence of 3+ children (and men from competition in cross-class hierarchy). But the evidence is what it is – that our civ is in danger b/c we’ve scaled female antisocial behavior w/o limiting it as male.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-01-12 09:51:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1613473661834477568

    Reply addressees: @jordanbpeterson

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1613471596865363968

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @jordanbpeterson JP: I’m not quite sure how female neuroticism, magical thinking, and projection, result in imaginary models of the world, and what can be done about it if anything, when the behavior is so pervasive that we can destroy a civ from within by the mass distribution of their ‘gossip’.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1613471596865363968

  • What is it to be man when man is god? This is the natural European religion. It’

    What is it to be man when man is god?

    This is the natural European religion.
    It’s the Semites who invented submission and undermining as a resistance movement against the indo European race, civilizations, and aristocratic culture of acheivement instead of their stagnation.

    Source date (UTC): 2022-12-29 14:13:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1608466267148525568

    Reply addressees: @TheMcGloneCode

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1608465549566308354

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @TheMcGloneCode Who do we imitate? The religious question? Imitate(static) or evolve into(grow)? There is a reason the more devout the lower the rate of innovation, adaptation, and evolution. The question is, what does man evolve into when he least varies from the laws of nature & nature’s god?

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1608465549566308354

  • CONTENT MODERATION We’re looking for an AI solution to the problem because of th

    CONTENT MODERATION

    We’re looking for an AI solution to the problem because of the sheer volume. And if we do that, let’s see what we can learn:

    The founder of moderation, Jim Rutt, gave us three categories we can tag as:

    1. manners(decorum), such as cursing, slurs, ad hom, and;
      … … We prohibit violations of manners.
    2. content(taboos), porn, violence, lawbreaking etc, and;
      … … We prohibit violations of taboos (content)
    3. bias(want, position, viewpoint) – spectrum of masculine merit to feminine non.
      … … We tag the biases, and explain their origin by doing so.

    And to this we can add (and Tag):

    1. testifiability (truth/falsehood) – can you claim this is true?
    2. reciprocity (morality/immorality) – can you claim this is moral/ethical?

    And to this we can add (and Tag):

    1. Methods of argument used (truth, deceit) – there are only so many.
    2. Sex Differences in deceit – and each is expressible as male or female bias because all biases as are all differences in humans, are the result of sex differences in perception, cognition, and valuation.

    And by tagging each ‘post’ we teach everyone on earth how to tell the truth thruth, and what is moral.

    So yes we can automate content moderation. And yes, we can automate some incentives to improve by doing so. But more importantly we can explain, by construction from first principles, not only our own arguments – but the opposition’s as well.

    And only then is ‘liberty’ – a state of reciprocity – possible. Because only then is a standard of weights and measures both existential, empirically demonstrated in vast numbers, but nearly universally understood. And as such we can trade between our moral biases. Largely: resources produced by those with more self regulation in ecchange for behavior (self regulation) by those with less self regulation.

    “A Surreptitious Universal Education In Morality”

    -Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2022-11-21 17:04:50 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/109382879805650484

  • Yes, it’s all “Marxism” where “Marxism” as we use it, refers to the reformation

    Yes, it’s all “Marxism” where “Marxism” as we use it, refers to the reformation of abrahamic supernatural religions of false promise in excahgne for social construction of an oppression narrative, into marxist pseudoscientific religions of false promise in exchange for social construction of an oppression narrative.

    –“So-called “Cultural Marxism” is not Marxist. To Marx our material conditions produce our ideologies, not the other way around. All of Marxism is built on that historical materialist, rather than idealist, assumption. It’s what makes Marxism Marxism, its defining characteristic.”– Bill Hickey

    First, Formal and informal institutions are in fact material conditions. This is the purpose of Hayek’s insights: So that we do not engage in self-deception as by Marx’s cherrypicking. Instead, in formation, institutions, habits, norms, and traditions are assets.

    Second, AFAIK, and this will take a bit of understanding: the female method of undermining, storytelling, and social construction (Sedition) > The Abrahamic religions (Supernaturalism) > The Marxist spectrum of religions (Pseudoscience) all use the same logical and persuasive METHOD.

    So, Feminine > Abrahamic > Maxist undermining, sedition, and treason, combine masculine European systematizing (logic) with feminine Semitic undermining (resistance) and mythicism. That’s the ‘invention’ of the Jewish religion, the Abrahamic religions, and the Marxist religions.

    In other words, the reason female rallying, Abrahamism and Marxism succeed is by blaming (others) men (white european males, indo european civilization, paternalism) who discover and adapt to nature for the laws of nature, claiming thier oppression, rather than domestication.

    The interesting question posed by the success of Feminine(Universal)> Abrahamic(Ancient)> Marxist(Modern) sequence of seditious cults, is “Why are we so vulnerable to the feminine method of suggestion despite its untestifiability, unwarrantability, non-correspondence w/ reality?

    So the feminine > abrahamic > marxist cults of sedition, which evolved in the females as a means of organizing betas against alphas, to gain control over reproduction, promises the impossible violation of natural laws if rallying against men can be performed against nature.

    Now, I’ve decomposed their method down to a formal logic of its first causes and fully articulated the feminine> Abrahamic> Marxist means of warfare by sedition and treason using social construction of false promises. And it’s possible to outlaw like any other FRAUD or SEDITION.

    The answer is rather obvious: because it suggests that by consent to a social construction that denies the formal, physical, behavioral, and evolutionary laws of the universe, that we can escape those laws (truth, scarcity, rational self interest, natural selection).

    Source date (UTC): 2022-11-21 16:29:39 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/109382741489639310

  • DEMAND FOR A TRUTHFUL RELIGION In context we are continuing the evolution of civ

    DEMAND FOR A TRUTHFUL RELIGION

    In context we are continuing the evolution of civs into science, rule of law, and federations of modern man, and leaving behind storytelling, rule by man, empires, of agrarian man – all possible by the classical restoration in Europe, and the sci-tech revolutions that followed.

    Unfortunately, given the vast differences in age and ability and biases in sex, there remains in man a need to discipline intuition with what in the past has included certain pre-cognitive normative training by ‘religion’.

    But I’ve come to understand how that problem is solved.

    The fictionalisms(idealism, pseudoscience, supernaturalism), Pilpul(sophistry), Critique(undermining), False Promise(fraud), baiting into hazard(hazarding) are all methods of lying. They are also the means by which the abrahamic religions and the marxist religions are created.

    But a truthful religion is possible.
    It it possible for all?
    The means of teaching it will have to vary.
    Parables for children, rules for youth, understanding for adults.
    W

    Source date (UTC): 2022-10-23 14:21:44 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/109218031497356913

  • YOUR INTENTIONS FRAME YOUR OUTCOMES AS DOES YOUR METHODOLOGY The unconscious rea

    YOUR INTENTIONS FRAME YOUR OUTCOMES AS DOES YOUR METHODOLOGY

    The unconscious reason that caused me to solve the outstanding hard problems in what we call philosophy, is my initial motivation was to provide a truthful, value-neutral, language of ethics and politics. So I solved for true and neutral – not good. A logic of truth, not good.

    From truth, you can then produce non-false goods.
    By presuming a good, wIthout truth first, you can justify (false) means of claiming you can produce goods.

    Good point of clarity for new followers: Technically speaking I’m an epistemologist and logician. My only primary research is in epistemology(truth) and logic(calculating really). I read other people’s primary research and synthesize it by making it commensurable. That’s all.

    I should add that it’s not obvious, that my work on the grammars, and particularly on lying, and sex differences in lying, is primary research that to my knowledge hasn’t been developed before, and is a net contribution. It’s just a contribution that a lotta people won’t like. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2022-10-23 14:18:04 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/109218017093752157