Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Explaining Consciousness Indirectly

    October 28th, 2018 1:03 PM EXPLAINING CONSCIOUSNESS INDIRECTLY

    —“Where does “the present” (initial, whole experience) as opposed to memory and the rest (post hoc, partial translations) fit into your model?”— Ben Quimby

    [W]e create the latter in order to increase our chose and volume and intensity of consumption of the former.

    —“But it *is* something that stands alone outside of all these categories, yes? Part of each moment, necessarily, does not carry over into any translation, making said parts, by definition, “ineffable”, correct?”— Ben Quimby

    Well, you know, if you ask it that way I have to defend against misinterpretation. “experience” is our ultra-short-term memory continuously learning and forgetting the cacophony of stimuli from our nervous system, and the ‘echoes’ that they produce in from our memories, and the consequent chemical responses (feelings) that those echoes produce Memories require we merely ‘choke’ our senses and focus on (not sure how we do that, but I assume it’s the hippocampus) the echoes rather than the perceptions (senses). I know it’s related to how we focus our vision, and I know it’s an evolution of the prey drive, but that’s all I know. So there is no difference except focus. All experience is RECONSTRUCTED from the combination of sensation and memory. We just bias our focus on present(sense) vs past(memory) within that stream of stimulation. So there are not two separate things, but simply the resources devoted to senses vs recalls so that we experience greater now than the past. GIven that our brains allow us to do both of these at the same time only enhances the illusion.

  • WHY AND HOW PILPUL FUNCTIONS AS A MEANS OF DECEPTION. —“(((They))) win by crea

    WHY AND HOW PILPUL FUNCTIONS AS A MEANS OF DECEPTION.

    —“(((They))) win by creating false dichotomies; the use of language is very important.”—Mirjana Bilić

    Their technique of Pilpul: They use an element of truth to create a false dichotomy and therefore frame the question by suggestion, and obscure the solution due to anchoring.

    We are always vulnerable to anchoring.

    Because we are vulnerable to anchoring we are vulnerable to framing.

    Because we are vulnerable to framing we are vulnerable to suggestion and obscurantism.

    Because we are vulnerable to suggestion and obscurantism we are vulnerable to influence.

    If we are provided for incentive to justify that influence we can be controlled – by BLOCKING our OPPORTUNITY and MOTIVATION for seeking truth.

    The three abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) all produce recursive ignorance cue to BLOCKING our search for truth.

    This is how PILPUL is used to deceive, and why math, logic, science, economics, law and testimonial truth are such an important defense.

    A lie (incentive), a half truth, a False dichotomy (choice).

    Low trust people simply dont’ go beyond the tangible. High trust people do. Our asset of high trust in constructing the commons which produce such outsized returns compared to other peoples. But our trust( suspension of disbelief), and vulnerability to anchoring, suggestion, and obscurantism make our ordinary folk easily deceived, manipulated, controlled, and preyed upon.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-28 14:27:00 UTC

  • EXPLAINING CONSCIOUSNESS INDIRECTLY —“Where does “the present” (initial, whole

    EXPLAINING CONSCIOUSNESS INDIRECTLY

    —“Where does “the present” (initial, whole experience) as opposed to memory and the rest (post hoc, partial translations) fit into your model?”— Ben Quimby

    We create the latter in order to increase our chose and volume and intensity of consumption of the former.

    —“But it *is* something that stands alone outside of all these categories, yes? Part of each moment, necessarily, does not carry over into any translation, making said parts, by definition, “ineffable”, correct?”— Ben Quimby

    Well, you know, if you ask it that way I have to defend against misinterpretation. “experience” is our ultra-short-term memory continuously learning and forgetting the cacophony of stimuli from our nervous system, and the ‘echoes’ that they produce in from our memories, and the consequent chemical responses (feelings) that those echoes produce

    Memories require we merely ‘choke’ our senses and focus on (not sure how we do that, but I assume it’s the hippocampus) the echoes rather than the perceptions (senses). I know it’s related to how we focus our vision, and I know it’s an evolution of the prey drive, but that’s all I know.

    So there is no difference except focus. All experience is RECONSTRUCTED from the combination of sensation and memory. We just bias our focus on present(sense) vs past(memory) within that stream of stimulation.

    So there are not two separate things, but simply the resources devoted to senses vs recalls so that we experience greater now than the past.

    GIven that our brains allow us to do both of these at the same time only enhances the illusion.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-28 13:03:00 UTC

  • THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT NECESSARY AND WHY (important concepts) The form of govern

    THE FORM OF GOVERNMENT NECESSARY AND WHY

    (important concepts)

    The form of government *necessary* for a people depends upon their demographic distribution, homogeneity, and the size of the middle class, because the middle class generates demand for rule of law, and the state generates demand for income from the wealth the middle class generates. So in the competition between rule of law and rule by man, demand is driven by conditions.

    THis market is created by the competition for profits by the middle classes and their employees vs rents by the state and their dependents, with the principle difference being that the state can more easily concentrate startup capital and market advantage for heavy capital industries at the cost of corruption – and while the private sector cannot so easily produce the capital and market advantage through trade policy, the private sector can better utilize that capital and suppress state corruption since market competition suppresses rents.

    For historical reasons (geography, militia order, and ‘competitive’ bipartite manorialism), the west evolved cross-family corporations rather than intra-family clans, and as such superior trust, superior ability to produce commons because of it, and as such superior ability to generate large scale private sector organizations with greater innovation and returns on capital.

    Just as social orders became anchored (religion) during the age of transformation (the restoration after the bronze age collapse) societies became anchored during the industrial transformation after the Abrahamic Collapse (judaism,christianity,islam: the semitic – turkic invasion).

    Fukuyama attributed the success of european bureaucracy to its development prior to democracy. Because, despite his stated positions, his analysis favors the sino tradition of monolithic bureaucracy.

    Cheers.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-28 10:19:00 UTC

  • THE OCCULT IS ONE OF THE FICTIONALIST GRAMMARS. HERE IS WHY IT WORKS. CLASSES OF

    THE OCCULT IS ONE OF THE FICTIONALIST GRAMMARS.

    HERE IS WHY IT WORKS. CLASSES OF PACKS.

    —“I think occult literature is to exercise and train the mind. Seeing the world through symbolism and allegory gives you a more well rounded world view. The imagination training alone to keep a sharp inner vision is worth the effort.”– Zack Sunday

    contrast with:

    —“I started following your new friends. I think I just gagged on an Ebola”— a friend

    —“Evola is Harry Potter for the resurgent right.”—Neil A. Bucklew

    —“It’s cool, it’s hip, and it’s accessible. You read something like Metaphysics of War, and it’s not that different from The Fellowship of the Ring. Same beautifully constructed sentences, full of poetic words, riddled with lofty nouns that are inevitably capitalized like the philosophical texts of old.

    One of my favourites is when they capitalize Truth (whatever the fuck that’s supposed to mean). Who the fuck wants to read this “operational”, “via negativa” garbage, whatever that is? It all looks like computer code to me and that stuff is for nerds, right?

    These kids grew up with this stuff, this poison from Arktos and Counter-Currents. And what’s more, they will never, for the life of them, consider that maybe – just maybe – they shouldn’t trust these jesters and their sources, all of which are rooted in religious texts.

    You see, atheism or even agnosticism, those aren’t options; those are the tools of the Left. Surely, we cannot espouse the opinions of the Left, so instead, we will regress further and further and become ever more backward until this vile, leftist materialism and its child, despicable Science, are utterly obliterated and replaced with a spiritually transcendent society, which will be guided by religious texts, “perennial truths”, that were totally not written by fools and deceptive human beings, but instead written by people possessed by powerful, metaphysical forces, the names of which are once again capitalized for effect and this perverted stack of lies continues getting higher and higher and higher..”—by Göran Dahl

    —“We live in a natural world. The Mere belief in an old order and the mere feeling of how that order looks like or how it would look like in this age is not the right way to re-evolve it. Evola and Doolittle are observing the same thing, but the holes of Doolittle’s sieve are much smaller compared to those of Evola’s. If Evola and Doolittle are to observe, for example, the solar system, Evola would propose that the reason a planet orbits the sun is that its matter has some kind of tendency for orbiting or a sort of motility. But Doolittle WILL explain that the reason a planet orbits the sun is a central force which varies exactly inversely as the square distance from the center. Now what I’m aiming at is that while Evola knows exactly what he wants to impose, he lacks A THEORY, he lacks a scientific language that would’ve helped him in understanding what he intuited, and therefore he fell into many traps, one of them is the savior myth. What we need is a scientific research paper that uses measurements and organizational charts not intuitions and poetic licenses.”–by Ahmed Reda

    —“I dont understand why people are so blind to the point of fact that it is necessary to hit a problem from multiple angles ….. We need the Evolas, Doolittles, Spencer’s, Trumps, IEs, nordfronts, TWPs, Dark enlightenments, Molyneuxs…. if even for the sole purpose of competition to strengthen the winners in their respective actionsets.”—Austyn Pember

    — CURT —

    SENTIMENTS: IT’S JUST NEUROLOGICALLY CHEAPER

    The Occult? Fiction? Sophisms?

    Its actually just easier (cheaper) – to reduce dependence upon reason and memory, and let the connections be made by free association and suggestion. (it is easier to be programmed than to program the self)

    These free associations cast a broader opportunity net at the expense of deduction and inference. When you say ‘well rounded’ that’s nonsense. when you say ‘cheaper and easier with greater reach for opportunity’ that’s true.

    So, increase precision with calculation and computation, and decrease precision with reason and more so with intuition.

    There is a correlation between age and dependence upon intuition vs reason. There is a correlation between isolation and dependence on intuition vs reason. I can intuit those relationships but I don’t feel comfortable stating the causality yet, although it does remind me of the feeling testosterone produces, that in turn, increases the radius of our awareness and thought in males as we mature. I suspect that this is the causal relationship between neural economy, state of endocrine development, and accumulated knowledge.

    -Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-28 10:14:00 UTC

  • CONTINENTALISM, NATIONALISM, STATE CAPITALISM. One world government, monopoly, a

    CONTINENTALISM, NATIONALISM, STATE CAPITALISM.

    One world government, monopoly, authoritarian communism vs continentalism, nationalism, state capitalism. Why is that a difficult choice, versus empires or one-empire of world government?

    India for Indians, Europa-America-Australia for Europeans, “Semitica” for Semites, Africa for Africans, Asia for Asians, South America for South Americans and Amerindians, Pacifica for Pacificans.

    Why this arrangement under many nation states is other than optimum is extremely difficult to understand.

    We could all build walls and be at peace with one another. Good fences and good walls make good neighbors.

    There is no ‘human right’ to access the civilization of European people. Our ancestors worked very hard to eliminate the ‘familialism and tribalism’ of the other civilizations. Only the Europeans (Atlantic-Germanic-Slavs), and the East Asians Han-Korean-Japanese) have achieved it. And only the hindus have produced as ‘kind’ a social order despite the burden of their demographics. The chinese have chip on their shoulder due to the century of embarrassment. The africans need nothing but time and defense against the horrors of islam. and all of us need defense against the horrors of Semitica – expansionary islamism. Only the west is ‘naive’ and trusting (Foolish) enough not to defend herself from conquest.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-28 09:24:00 UTC

  • Definancialization

    October 27th, 2018 12:05 PM

    —“Almost every conflict that we could name can be traced back to financial institutions, And they have all been centered around the control of others resources,”—

    [I]f you want to argue that we evolved: from normative governance > to religious governance > to legal governance > to credit governance > (and are moving into digital reputation governance as we have seen in China and the UK) …then yes. If you want to argue that we must definancialize the economy and polity such that we are once again under rule of law instead of credit and digital reputation; and that doing so will end the extraction of rates of reproduction and quality of life from the middle classes in order to increase the reproduction of the lower classes, and payment of the upper classes for doing so, then yes I am in agreement. If you attempt to deny that the organized application fo violence in the systematic use of law, to incrementally suppress free riding, parasitism and predation ISN”T how we civilized mankind by forcing people into markets, that’s going to be very difficult. Because politics(legislation and regulation) and law(Findings of law of Tort) are merely proxies for violence. if you want to argue that redistribution without constraint on reproduction is a good thing then you are engaging in moralizing in a misguided attempt to devolve civilization, standard of living, and replace democracy markets and rule of law with authoritarian central management and it’s deterministic consequences: dysgenia, and consequential impoverishment. Nature isn’t kind, people aren’t equal at all, and the difference in standards of living is little more than the difference in the sizes of the underclasses – those more successful at soft eugenics (suppressing underclass reproduction and upward redistribution of reproduction to the middle class), produced the highest standard of living for the simple reason that rate of raining increases rapidly below the upper thirty percent ( of the west) which is why india cannot become a china for example. But if you want to engage in feminine gossiping, rallying, shaming and ridicule, rather than argument you’re just perpetuating the problem. I know how to definnacialize the economy. I know how to redistribute standard of living from the financial, political, and entertainment classes to the middle productive classes. But are you willint to limit reproduction of the underclasses to one child in return? Economics in everything. It’s just physics for humans.

  • Forcing the Cathedral to Do Penance for The Crime of Yelling Wolf

    October 27th, 2018 9:49 AM CLIMATE: FORCING THE CATHEDRAL TO DO PENANCE FOR THE CRIME OF YELLING WOLF FOR FUN AND PROFIT(for newbs: Cathedral = Academy, Media, State Complex: the new ‘church’.) [I] was directly involved and know the political end of the AGW movement (and lost a lot of money), and I think (as usual) Harrari’s argument (his book) is typical pilpul (his usual articulate bullshit). The people (skeptics) are punishing the academy and state for their handling of the issue. That’s what’s going on. They are forcing the academy and state to do penance for suppressing the counter-research, doing shoddy research, pursuing grant money by fraud, and trying to move to the left in by seizing the opportunity. And my opinion is that it should be criminal to act as the academy and state did in this matter, and people should be in jail for it. That said, we are getting fairly close to an understanding of what is actually going on in the climate, and it’s not clear that other than converting to nuclear power, and cutting the population to 1/6th, that we can (or should) do anything about it. NONE of the predictions, either in the 1970’s with global cooling, or in the 2000’s with AGW, or in the 2010’s with “Climate Change” have played out. Every single period in history, usually created by volcanic activity, has created much higher heat retention, which is rapidly corrected. We are nowhere close to it. Current variations in the climate are within normal ‘noise’, and the statistical analysis of the temperature readings follows the same errors of the statistical analysis of the stock market (shown by mandelbrot) and that this is just noise not signal. All evidence is that very little is going to happen and that all we need to do, if anything, is move to nuclear power, electric vehicles, and cut the population back to 1-3B. Worse, we are entering another cooling period. We have to because of the various perturbations of the orbit and axis. And the recent warming period is nearly over. I think everyone is largely attention seeking, and that as usually, the scientific community is seeking research dollars, the press attention, the state power, and the people who pay for it the truth. The truth is we are affecting the heat retention of the planet. And we have no freaking clue what is going to happen because of it – and we have no freaking clue how the planet will respond to it. But one thing is sure given the history of human thought: what’s being said is hyperbole. Follow Judith Curry’s web site which is the most accurate (scientific) analysis of the movement and its current status. Harrari is just another (((populist))) author selling abrahamic fantasy literature to the weak. STATE OF CLIMATE DATA If y’all can’t understand this report and how ‘moderate’ any change in the climate will be, then y’all are too ignorant and possibly too stupid to open your collective mouths on the subject. https://judithcurry.com/2018/10/11/climate-uncertainty-monster-whats-the-worst-case/

  • Definancialization

    October 27th, 2018 12:05 PM

    —“Almost every conflict that we could name can be traced back to financial institutions, And they have all been centered around the control of others resources,”—

    [I]f you want to argue that we evolved: from normative governance > to religious governance > to legal governance > to credit governance > (and are moving into digital reputation governance as we have seen in China and the UK) …then yes. If you want to argue that we must definancialize the economy and polity such that we are once again under rule of law instead of credit and digital reputation; and that doing so will end the extraction of rates of reproduction and quality of life from the middle classes in order to increase the reproduction of the lower classes, and payment of the upper classes for doing so, then yes I am in agreement. If you attempt to deny that the organized application fo violence in the systematic use of law, to incrementally suppress free riding, parasitism and predation ISN”T how we civilized mankind by forcing people into markets, that’s going to be very difficult. Because politics(legislation and regulation) and law(Findings of law of Tort) are merely proxies for violence. if you want to argue that redistribution without constraint on reproduction is a good thing then you are engaging in moralizing in a misguided attempt to devolve civilization, standard of living, and replace democracy markets and rule of law with authoritarian central management and it’s deterministic consequences: dysgenia, and consequential impoverishment. Nature isn’t kind, people aren’t equal at all, and the difference in standards of living is little more than the difference in the sizes of the underclasses – those more successful at soft eugenics (suppressing underclass reproduction and upward redistribution of reproduction to the middle class), produced the highest standard of living for the simple reason that rate of raining increases rapidly below the upper thirty percent ( of the west) which is why india cannot become a china for example. But if you want to engage in feminine gossiping, rallying, shaming and ridicule, rather than argument you’re just perpetuating the problem. I know how to definnacialize the economy. I know how to redistribute standard of living from the financial, political, and entertainment classes to the middle productive classes. But are you willint to limit reproduction of the underclasses to one child in return? Economics in everything. It’s just physics for humans.

  • The Myth of The Noble Savages vs The the Debts of Ignoble Savages

    (unpleasant)(insensitivity warning) —“Violence is a precious resource. We civilised thewhole world using violence. That’s the history ofcivilisation: the incremental suppression of parasitismthrough the organised application of violence.”–Curt Doolittle —“Thoughts?”– Joel Harvey —“If by “parasitism” you mean “the extermination of indigenous people who had a reciprocal relationship with the world and then the forced conversion of there children, theft of there resources and obliteration of there memories so the could end up fat useless consumers” then yeah brother, We are lovely“— Damien Woodgate Yes, we dragged them out of ignorance, superstition, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and endemic violence – and we did it for profit, and we did it against their will; and they fought us kicking and screaming, all the way; and they are unthankful for it. And other than profiting from it, and having a great european civil war over the profitability of it, and leaving the job unfinished, so rather than continue our work, that we had to fight the communists and now the islamists in their attempts at reversal of our work, while fighting the jews and puritans within our societies undermining our work, it seems to have done us no good – because they make up fantasy stories of the noble savage living peaceful lives in harmony with nature, instead of half domesticated animals at malthusian limits relentlessly preying upon one another in endemic competition, corruption, violence, and warfare. So yes, we failed to complete our program of profiting from the domestication of barely humane humans, and enforcing farming, industry, technology, science, medicine, plenty, literacy, relative peace, charity to women, and long lives upon them, and they are resentful, because they cannot bear the thought of thanking us when we succeeded, or thanking us for exterminating those who were the most primitive, the most work, and who were dedicated out failure. We are not equals as individuals as classes, as groups, polities, nations, civilizations, or “races” if that means anything more than ‘civilizations’. We dragged all of mankind out of barbarism. No man is a hero to his debtors. That said, none of us should expect respect or appreciation from our debtors. Our project was incomplete. However, in retrospect, we could have and perhaps should have treated white man’s burden as Pragmatic Heathen rather than Utopian Christian and instead of converting (educating) them, and improving their condition, simply engaged in organized replacement of them. Because history shows we always ‘lose’ when we are tolerant, ruling, or colonizing, and we have always ‘won’ and advanced ourselves and mankind rapidly whenever we conduct replacement. And that is the lesson that our ungrateful ‘Debtors’ have taught us (yet again). The evidence is rather glaringly obvious: Replacement of less domesticated (evolved) peoples is the dominant force in developmental history, and produces the optimum results for not only us, but for all mankind. Hence the necessity of separatism. That is the lesson of history.