Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • WESTERN CIVILIZATION’S EMPHASIS ON RULE OF LAW: SELF DETERMINATION Western Civil

    WESTERN CIVILIZATION’S EMPHASIS ON RULE OF LAW: SELF DETERMINATION

    Western Civilization organized unlike all others, to produce individual agency sufficient for individual self-determination. The evolution was: prisoner, slave, serf, freeman, citizen, and sovereign, with the ancient meaning of slave, as an indentured ward (not chattel slavery).

    When Americans say “Unconstitutional” it’s not as in Europe where the citizens aren’t sovereign – the state is. The American Constitution imposes Natural Law (Scientific Law), under the Common Law (Market) demanding Reciprocity (Contractualism) where INDIVIDUALS are sovereign.

    The purpose of western rule of law is the construction and preservation of self-determination, by denying via-positiva power to any and all, and granting only via-negativa power to any and all to right violations of irreciprocity: self-determination.

    Western civilization has a price of entry: Reciprocity of Self Determination in Display, Word, and Deed. You are either capable of paying this price of membership or you are not. No one decides for you. You demonstrate your capability or not. If you can’t you can’t, you can’t.

    Western Rule of Law grants self-determination (citizenship) to those who demonstrate self-determination, self-sufficiency, and the absence of irreciprocity. This limits political participation (via-positiva force) to those who have demonstrated self-determination.

    Western Trifunctionalism creates a market between state(Formal Commons) by those with power, Law(Formal Cooperation) by those with assets, and Words (Formal Norms) meaning Religion, philosophy by the weak.

    We don’t do a monopoly.

    The left does ONLY monopoly.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-10-13 18:38:13 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105028930273823114

  • THE CONSTITUTIONAL TRADE WITH THE COGNITIVELY FEMININE (DYSGENIC LEFT) When Amer

    THE CONSTITUTIONAL TRADE WITH THE COGNITIVELY FEMININE (DYSGENIC LEFT)

    When Americans say “Unconstitutional” it’s not as in Europe where the citizens aren’t sovereign – the state is. The American Constitution imposes Natural Law (Scientific Law), under the Common Law (Market) demanding Reciprocity (Contractualism) where INDIVIDUALS are sovereign.

    Why does this matter? Because the only reason to forgo conquest, enserfment, enslavement, or ‘replacement’ is the exchange of self-determination: Sovereignty. In other words, if the left won’t trade self-determination, we are free to likewise deprive them of EVERYTHING.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-10-13 14:15:48 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105027898455756923

  • Differences

    FROM MY POST ON QUORA There is absolutely no dispute any longer over race, class, and gender differences in IQ and personality within the field – and we know the structural, chemical, and genetic causes. We also know that the counter-arguments are produced by people outside the field, or marginally within the field, and worse, that sociology and sociology suffer from the replication crisis. The numbers are correct, and they are MORE correct as time passes as we age and educational differences don’t mask biological differences. This doesn’t mean x race is dumber than y race. It means there are more dumb people in x race than y race because climate didn’t cause natural selection, agrarianism didn’t cause natural selection and markets didn’t cause natural selection that reduced the size of the underclasses (those who cannot adapt to increasingly complex work at low cost.) For example, in the UK where most African immigrants are from Nigeria or Ghana, the numbers are quite good – because those two countries have had middle classes the longest. This does not apply to other areas of Africa. Likewise, in SE Europe, which has had Turkic Ingression, the European IQ is substantially lower than the rest of Europe. Worse, given the reversal of eugenic reproduction in European countries we have lost about 15 points of IQ since the beginning of the industrial revolution. So: 1) A group’s aggregate IQ is MORE a function of the size of the underclass than group (racial) differences in traits. 2) The next primary difference is neotenic evolution – slowing development buying better neurological performance and larger brains (East Asians are the most neotenously evolved, with the largest brains). 3) Neotenic evolution slows maturity and lessens maturity, which lowers aggression, particularly during maturity, and allows continue cognitive development – particularly executive function (self-control, or agency). The problem is that your quality of life is more dependent upon the IQ of your neighbors than your own. This is the challenge of all developing countries – especially now that the European technological advantage has been redistributed to the world, and growth has flattened since the war. The primary difference between racial distributions is that East Asians and west Europeans (a) were more homogenous and isolated, (b) were more neotenized by the ice age, (c) practiced institutional economic eugenics during the medieval period (manorialism), and (d) practiced drastic capital punishment over the past 1000 years. These drastic reductions in the underclass skew the averages. There are also subtle but significant differences in personality distribution, and comprehension – principally verbal acuity, and environmental awareness with Amerindians and Asians the general examples. That said, (a) brain size, (b) degree of neoteny, (c) neural density – particularly in size and thickness of the cortex, and the number and distribution of the tiny connective neurons produce these differences. These adaptations are facilitated by evolution in a cold climate in isolation among small homogeneous groups. If you have a basic understanding of genetics you’d know that the difference in genetics regulating brain size in a chicken and an ape is almost. The difference in regulating brain size between chimps and humans something on the order of ten times. The races have different gestation periods, different maturity rates, different depths of maturity, and different ages of reproduction, and different rates of copulation. Humans self-domesticated. It was hardest in Africa with the number of human variations, less hard outside of Africa with fewer variations but more survival options, less hard as we migrated north, with more survival options but harder survival conditions. It must have been a wonderful time between leaving Africa 60,000 years ago, evolving into fully modern humans by 40,000 years ago, and hunting ourselves out of large game by the mesolithic 15,000 years ago. Same for the Americas. In about the same amount of time in both the Americas and Eurasia, we had overhunted everything in Eurasia but rabbits, birds, and deer. People didn’t take up agrarianism because they wanted to. They had to. It was just a miracle that despite a much harder working life agrarianism supported more people than hunting and gathering. The Three Lies of the Left: 1) the false promise of continuous growth. 2) the false promise of the morality of man – man is amoral (Practical). 3) the false promise of the malleability of man – its 80% genetic and 20% idiosyncratic developmental differences. Please don’t waste my time unless you have mastered the literature by at least the top ten people in the field.

  • Differences

    FROM MY POST ON QUORA There is absolutely no dispute any longer over race, class, and gender differences in IQ and personality within the field – and we know the structural, chemical, and genetic causes. We also know that the counter-arguments are produced by people outside the field, or marginally within the field, and worse, that sociology and sociology suffer from the replication crisis. The numbers are correct, and they are MORE correct as time passes as we age and educational differences don’t mask biological differences. This doesn’t mean x race is dumber than y race. It means there are more dumb people in x race than y race because climate didn’t cause natural selection, agrarianism didn’t cause natural selection and markets didn’t cause natural selection that reduced the size of the underclasses (those who cannot adapt to increasingly complex work at low cost.) For example, in the UK where most African immigrants are from Nigeria or Ghana, the numbers are quite good – because those two countries have had middle classes the longest. This does not apply to other areas of Africa. Likewise, in SE Europe, which has had Turkic Ingression, the European IQ is substantially lower than the rest of Europe. Worse, given the reversal of eugenic reproduction in European countries we have lost about 15 points of IQ since the beginning of the industrial revolution. So: 1) A group’s aggregate IQ is MORE a function of the size of the underclass than group (racial) differences in traits. 2) The next primary difference is neotenic evolution – slowing development buying better neurological performance and larger brains (East Asians are the most neotenously evolved, with the largest brains). 3) Neotenic evolution slows maturity and lessens maturity, which lowers aggression, particularly during maturity, and allows continue cognitive development – particularly executive function (self-control, or agency). The problem is that your quality of life is more dependent upon the IQ of your neighbors than your own. This is the challenge of all developing countries – especially now that the European technological advantage has been redistributed to the world, and growth has flattened since the war. The primary difference between racial distributions is that East Asians and west Europeans (a) were more homogenous and isolated, (b) were more neotenized by the ice age, (c) practiced institutional economic eugenics during the medieval period (manorialism), and (d) practiced drastic capital punishment over the past 1000 years. These drastic reductions in the underclass skew the averages. There are also subtle but significant differences in personality distribution, and comprehension – principally verbal acuity, and environmental awareness with Amerindians and Asians the general examples. That said, (a) brain size, (b) degree of neoteny, (c) neural density – particularly in size and thickness of the cortex, and the number and distribution of the tiny connective neurons produce these differences. These adaptations are facilitated by evolution in a cold climate in isolation among small homogeneous groups. If you have a basic understanding of genetics you’d know that the difference in genetics regulating brain size in a chicken and an ape is almost. The difference in regulating brain size between chimps and humans something on the order of ten times. The races have different gestation periods, different maturity rates, different depths of maturity, and different ages of reproduction, and different rates of copulation. Humans self-domesticated. It was hardest in Africa with the number of human variations, less hard outside of Africa with fewer variations but more survival options, less hard as we migrated north, with more survival options but harder survival conditions. It must have been a wonderful time between leaving Africa 60,000 years ago, evolving into fully modern humans by 40,000 years ago, and hunting ourselves out of large game by the mesolithic 15,000 years ago. Same for the Americas. In about the same amount of time in both the Americas and Eurasia, we had overhunted everything in Eurasia but rabbits, birds, and deer. People didn’t take up agrarianism because they wanted to. They had to. It was just a miracle that despite a much harder working life agrarianism supported more people than hunting and gathering. The Three Lies of the Left: 1) the false promise of continuous growth. 2) the false promise of the morality of man – man is amoral (Practical). 3) the false promise of the malleability of man – its 80% genetic and 20% idiosyncratic developmental differences. Please don’t waste my time unless you have mastered the literature by at least the top ten people in the field.

  • The problems with educational pseudoscience are not less than: 1) Teaching needs

    The problems with educational pseudoscience are not less than:

    1) Teaching needs to be professionalized, and as a second career, with demonstrated life experience, demonstrated parenting, and demonstrated success.

    2) Teaching needs to convert from instruction to game playing, which means ‘automating’, with teachers serving as referee, and coach not instructor. We must automate education in the sense that it is cheap to produce ‘large scale simulations and games’

    3) Developing Harmony under Adversarialism is more important than developing harmony at the cost of adversarialism.

    4) Grooming, Dress, and Manners; grammar, vocabulary, and diction; natural law (ethics and morals) and economics, are as important as math and reading. Most of what is taught today is secular religion and it’s a sick religion.

    5) IQ and Consciousness are equally influential. As surprising as it may seem, the living environment or education has no impact on general intelligence in adulthood. They only way to improve demonstrated intelligence in the absence of IQ is through general knowledge(IQ), and ritual(conscientiousness). Both general knowledge and ritual produce mindfulness. The optimum mindfulness is epicureanism (joy within your means), stoicism (continuous self-authoring), sport (public positive adversarialism), civic projects (public participatory production of commons), and civic festivals (public participatory holidays). (My favorite example is responsibility for the sidewalk and street in front of your home.)

    6) We need to harmonize all knowlege through operationalism and the gramamrs so that we learn all knowledge all action all of the universe is a contiuum of very simple rules. this will ensure that every field is equally accessible to every person, and taht the environment saturates individuals with that knoweldge rather than conflicts with it.

    7) History is the skeleton upon which education is crafted with the clay of knowlege..

    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-25 10:10:00 UTC

  • It’s because the IQ increase doesn’t come from genetic origins or jewish religio

    It’s because the IQ increase doesn’t come from genetic origins or jewish religion, but from european admixture, and using judiasm and separatism, computational specialization, and aggressive upward redistribution of reproduction. The difference between north european cognitive elites (Tories) at 113 and european jews at 112 isn’t meaningful. What’s meaningful is that european jews produce twice as many outliers over 140? Why? The same cause that produces the range of neurological diseases in the Ashkenazi produces increased development of specific neurons and white matter. So the point I want to make in this post and the others I’m working on, is that there are limits to each biological channel humans have taken advantage of in order to develop our hyper adaptability. While there is probably some limit to human cognitive ability, and it’s probably what we consider in the 200’s or 300’s ( Terrance Tao is probably 220-230 and has no apparent defects (like say Chomsky)). His development is due to neotenic excellence we see in east Asia, and not to mutation (as we see in the Ashkenazim). In other words, Europeans have developed sufficient neoteny for cognitive excellence and adapted neotenic signaling without sexual neoteny (like east Asians). Europeans have cut the bottom, and increased metabolic ability, more than developed mutations. East Asians are demonstrating the value of neoteny at the cost of sexual expression (with obvious consequences we don’t talk about). So what’s left? isolating cognitive neoteny (developmental extension of early neurological development) and improving our means of computation (system of measurement and communication).

    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-25 00:07:00 UTC

  • WE KNOW THE NAME OF THE DEVIL Europeans speak in the language of the gods, writt

    WE KNOW THE NAME OF THE DEVIL

    Europeans speak in the language of the gods, written in the hand of the gods: math, science, physical law, natural law, and testimony.

    Abrahamism, in the words of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Marxism, Postmodernism, Feminism, Libertarianism and Neoconservatism all bait us into hazard – so do Freudianism, Boasianism, Neo-marxism(“Cultural Marxism”, Political Correctness, and Human-Biodiversity-Denialism.

    They teach us to lie. To Deny the language of the gods, written in the hands of the gods, and our means of transcendence into gods: evolution. The false promise of denial of the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. The false promise of freedom from scarcity by endless growth. The false promise of freedom from the amorality of man by denial of reciprocity (man’s nature). The false promise of the capacity of man( cognitive ability and regression to the mean).

    If you are a devil what do you seek? To prevent man’s transcendence into gods. To deny god his hands: mankind. To deny us evolution: the means by which we transcend into gods ourselves.

    If you are a devil what language would you speak? What does our foundational myth of the Blacksmith and the Devil tell us? The devils bait you into hazard with false promise. False promise of life after death, false promise of freedom from the physical and natural laws and evolutionary laws, that are the evidence of god’s will, and the tools by which we transcend man into gods.

    We know the name of the devil.

    His name was Abraham.

    He was from Ur.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-24 22:44:00 UTC

  • A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING OF INTELLIGENCE – AND MAN The history of the evolution

    A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING OF INTELLIGENCE – AND MAN

    The history of the evolution of mankind is the incremental acceleration of adaptability due to periodic stresses. While we don’t study it, climactic stresses in Africa alone during the past five million years were challenging.

    So it is better to describe individual and group intelligence as the rate of individual and group adaptability, and group strategy, metaphysics(paradigm), mythology, tradition, and *method of argument* as regulating our adaptability to our group ability.

    Unfortunately, group strategy can enhance of limit group adaptability, and can advance it (european) or regress it (Islam).

    By using the model (paradigm) of adaptability to relate human biological, social, cognitive, and linguistic processes, we create commensurability across domains and produce a universal understanding of human behavior – thus assisting us in demonstrating that the entire human spectrum of tools (biological, social, cognitive, linguistic AND informational) is not only ‘relative’ but absolutely non-neutral.

    So I’ll take the opportunity to state once again:

    Differences in ability are neotenic and neurological. They may be nothing more than neoteny facilitating differential neurological growth.

    We have cannot yet identify genes determining intelligence, and those we find (thousands) appear to have tiny effect.

    That differences in cognitive adaptability or the distribution of it (memory vs adaptability vs prediction-innovation vs agency) appear to leave little or no evidence in the fossil record other than minor variation in the volume of the braincase.

    We have definite archeological evidence in the record of the evolution of tools and processes.

    We have definite biological evidence in the record of differences in gestation rate, maturity rate, depth of maturity, and self-regulation (neoteny) – which is the direction of investigation that would help us understand intelligence.

    We have definite biological evidence in isolated populations that the earliest people out of africa have the lowest cognitive rate of adaptation, and those people in highest stress environments (colder) the highest.

    And we have a definite recent record in the size of class distributions across human groups.

    And agrarianism obscured this evolution and it and possibly reversed it – which is my suspicion. And that only those groups that converted to manorialism (Rome, Germanic Europe, China) continued it. Agrarianism homogenized populations significantly, and limited evolution, in exchange for providing calories that allowed us a division of labor, specialization, and the application of our adaptation to the production of ‘tools, processes, and ideas’.

    From what I can ‘guess’ from the record, females innovate in neotenic expression along the calcium-melanin channel which appears to have a dramatic effect on rates of reproduction (the time at which a woman appears desirable and fertile). And males innovate in the adaptive expression along the cognitive specialization channel – which as far as I know evolved from throwing spears (or throwing anything). And males either inherit neoteny from females or self domesticate along the testosterone channel since ‘bullying’ has to be kept at an equilibrium where there is sufficient aggression and dominance expression to maintain the competitive ability for the family, clan, tribe, without creating unmanageable internal conflict. My suspicion is that neoteny is a purely female specialization since women (unfortunately) do not select men for it, and therefore women maintain an equilibrium of their neoteny versus demonstrated male dominance, limiting of outsiders outside female social superpredation (control).

    This is my current understanding of the evolutionary process and the differences in the sexes, races, subraces, groups, and classes.

    What it would imply is that the great filter is rather obvious: that any species that develops a division of labor and the returns on it that allow continuous adaptation into niches (division of labor) – and especially any group that develops democracy rather than ‘paternalism’, and does not continue natural selection, will devolve. We can see genetic devolution in the west in just 150 years. We can see genetic devolution in islam and everything it touces. Islam(judaism christianity) is the most desirable falsehood other than drugs.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-24 10:17:00 UTC

  • As far as I know, intelligence is (like everything else) almost entirely genetic

    As far as I know, intelligence is (like everything else) almost entirely genetic. It’s early development biased. It’s controlled by a large number of REGULATORY rather than small number of protein-producing genes. The difference is purely neuronal. Of the neuronal difference its largely hippocampal and frontal. So a lot of things must go right for exceptional intelligence, and anything can go wrong.

    As far as I know nothing else is required of the paleolithic revolution (cognitively modern humans) other than an increase in IQ from the 50-60 (childlike but dangerous) range to the 70-80 range (unpleastant and hostile) to the 80-100 range (most of humanity), to the 100+ range (the people that make abstractions).

    As far as I know, the difference will not appear in changes in morphology.

    As far as I know cranial volume does appear in morphology and IQ.

    As far as I know just like spine and brain volume, developmental IQ is the resut of selection for neoteny (slowing development).

    As far as I know the races reproducte, mature, and have gestation rates that reflect this.

    As far as I know aboriginals isolated after the ice age increase in water levels have mid 60IQ’s

    As far as I know IQ roughtly translates to latitude – but I can’t yet determine if this is an agrarhian or pre-agrarian manifestation.

    As far as I know everyone woud have just GUESSED this prior to the second world war, and pseudoscience has tried desprately to suppress the obvious that science is not confirming.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-23 16:07:00 UTC

  • A REPEAT OF HISTORY —“Curt: Who were the “Sea People”?— Ancestral aryans spr

    A REPEAT OF HISTORY

    —“Curt: Who were the “Sea People”?—

    Ancestral aryans spread across europe. The group that spread into anatolia were the Hittites. They rose to power about equal to the egyptians and the mesopotamians. But the hittites overplayed their hand and like today’s Turks) sought westward expansion.

    The various people of the north mediterranean allied and took advantage of it, and destroyed them. And they found it so rewarding they took out everyone in the levant. But subsequently they overplayed their conquest-hand, and like the Romans ‘ran out of other peoples’ civilizatoins to raid and the socialists (ran out of other peoples money to spend).

    This raiding resulted in the bronze age collapse, and the first (recorded) dark age. Every civlization in the east mediterranean disappeard, with a weak mesopotamia and egypt the only surviving civs.

    While mesopotamia eventually recovered, egypt only survived and never regained her previous glory. The hittites were exterminated, as were the Minoans and every other peole along the eastern med coast. The greeks even lost writing. and the story of the trojan war is, like king arthur, a story developed during those dark ages that eventually evolved into the ancient world’s equivalent of the bible.

    The ‘age of transformatino’ or what we see as ‘the great flowering of civiization and the beginning of our religious traditions’ occurs (just like the enlightenment) as they came out of that dark age. Taht’s why so much happens from 800-300bc. Just like so much happens in europe from 1400 to 1900 ad.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-23 12:42:00 UTC