Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. FULFILLING YOUR NEEDS The reason you want a n

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    FULFILLING YOUR NEEDS
    The reason you want a narrative and an ideology is so that you can feel in a group and in control in a world where you have none. But the only control you have is over your understanding of that world and your interpretation of that world. So narratives are inhibitors not enablers.

    Propertarianism (Natural Law) will absolutely positively provide you with a consistent, correspondent, and coherent science, grammar, and logic with which to understand describe and interact with the world.

    Stoicism (Self authoring in goals and virtues) will absolutely positively provide you with the mindfulness to control your interpretation of that world.

    Restoration of our historical civilization to sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, truth, and markets in all aspects of life will allow us to achieve our individual interests within the limits of available knowledge and resources, as well as defend ourselves from primitive competitors, and if necessary conquer and govern them, and if left no other choice, to eliminate them.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 16:02:44 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. Conservatives are more likely to use an adult

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    Conservatives are more likely to use an adultery site than liberals, and libertarians much more likely than Conservatives. Why?

    Um. Let me help y’all. It’s COSTS. For libertarians especially, and conservatives in general, interpersonal connections come at higher costs. These web sites effectively suggest that they offer opportunities at lower interpersonal COST. (All behavior is cost driven & costs vary.)

    Liberals are always on the market, and the price is cheap. Conservatives are on the market and the price is expensive, and libertarians are on the market and price is most expensive.

    (via Skye Stewart, via Rolf Degen)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 14:02:59 UTC

  • THE EXISTENCE OF GODS. No. You don’t get it. Gods exist the way Socrates (Histor

    THE EXISTENCE OF GODS.

    No. You don’t get it. Gods exist the way Socrates (Historically), Siegfried(Mythically), and Gandalf(Fictionally) exist. Given that enough people study the wisdom of that mythos that emotional and intellectual norms develop from the ‘ritualization’, those gods exist in effect on our behavior if not in cause. These gods function as a standard of measurement at our most intuitionistic and most universal scale. Sympathy with shared experience and Synchronicity due to universal subjectivity to the same temporal streams of information, achieves what we consider supernatural, but is simply the consequence the culmination of patterns of behavior in concert with momentary information. I talk to gods every day. For the technique to work, whether with the god, a therapist, a friend, or yourself, you must be unable to lie in the role-play (prayer). If you can manage emotional and intellectual honesty with any god (collectively shared pattern of values), then you can obtain the benefit of the character’s frame of reference. The reason being that it is extremely hard for us to be intellectually honest with ourselves, and the act of speaking whether external or internal, forces continuous recursive disambiguation, which forces our brains to test our thoughts, just as we test our thoughts while we are speaking to others and anticipating their responses. By and large this system works extraordinarily well. If you combine that with self authoring and the virtues and select characters from history to represent those virtues and goals, and if you read enough about those people, you will in fact, obtain their wisdom through role playing discourse (prayer) – assuming you can practice intellectual honesty. Now, some of us lack the agency for this and this is why we have doctrine. But admission that you require doctrine is admission that you lack the agency to call yourself fully human. This is acceptable as long as you do not claim to possess the agency necessary to influence the decisions of others. And as such those of us who have agency must police those that do not, such that those who do not possess agency do not attempt to spread their lack of it.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 13:13:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. LANGUAGE CAUSES OVERESTIMATION OF SIMILARITIE

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    LANGUAGE CAUSES OVERESTIMATION OF SIMILARITIES

    We all have a will to power, but we also have physical, mental, and emotional resources to obtain it with; and that will is countered by fear and insecurity.

    Language is as natural as walking. But it causes us to overestimate our similarities. Empathy causes us to overestimate our similarities. Submission causes us to overestimate our similarities. Need causes us to overestimate our similarities. And a host of our cognitive biases evolved to convince us we are normal, or average, or like everyone else. But despite all those cognitive biases, we are demonstrably not all that similar in MARGINAL difference in the performance of emotional, cognitive, and physical tasks.

    We can often judge someone’s ability by their vocabulary and their reasoning – language is how we measure (diagnose) the mind. But the fact that we can speak to people across the human spectrum tells us nothing about our marginal (effective) differences.

    In fact, those cognitive biases for similarity(indifference) may be nothing other than an adaptation to the use of language, by providing us with greater imitation(of actions), sympathy(for wants), and empathy(for feelings), so that we more readily comprehend one another’s use of language so that in turn we may more readily reap the rewards of opportunities for the high returns on cooperation.

    The more Empathic, Sympathetic, Needful, and Vulnerable we are, the more incentive we have to find similarities (female) and the Dispassionate, Analytic, Independent, and Dominant we are the more incentive we have to identify and preserve our dissimilarities.

    Now think about that a little bit.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 12:22:22 UTC

  • FULFILLING YOUR NEEDS The reason you want a narrative and an ideology is so that

    FULFILLING YOUR NEEDS

    The reason you want a narrative and an ideology is so that you can feel in a group and in control in a world where you have none. But the only control you have is over your understanding of that world and your interpretation of that world. So narratives are inhibitors not enablers.

    Propertarianism (Natural Law) will absolutely positively provide you with a consistent, correspondent, and coherent science, grammar, and logic with which to understand describe and interact with the world.

    Stoicism (Self authoring in goals and virtues) will absolutely positively provide you with the mindfulness to control your interpretation of that world.

    Restoration of our historical civilization to sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, truth, and markets in all aspects of life will allow us to achieve our individual interests within the limits of available knowledge and resources, as well as defend ourselves from primitive competitors, and if necessary conquer and govern them, and if left no other choice, to eliminate them.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 12:02:00 UTC

  • TWO PARTY SYSTEM NEUTRALIZES IQ DIFFERENCES • In both the U.S. and Denmark intel

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289618300060https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289618300060THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM NEUTRALIZES IQ DIFFERENCES

    • In both the U.S. and Denmark intelligence failed to predict standard party choice.

    • This was due to opposing effects of intelligence on economic and social ideology.

    •Denmark’s multi-party system allows non-standard representations of party choice.

    •In Denmark, significant systematic intelligence differences observed between parties.

    Intelligence is rarely studied as a predictor of vote choice, and at first glance our data supports this neglect: In samples from the U.S. and Denmark (Ns = 1419 and 953), intelligence does not predict the standard operationalization of vote choice in which parties are placed on a single left-vs-right dimension. (Standardized coefficients predicting right-wing vote choice were 0.05 and −0.03, respectively.)

    However, this apparent non-effect in fact reflects approximately equal and opposite effects of intelligence on vote choice as transmitted through social and economic ideology. In both countries, higher ability predicts left-wing social and right-wing economic views.

    The impact of intelligence on vote choice is thus most visible in true multi-party systems like Denmark, in which parties do not simply pair similar levels of social and economic conservatism, but instead provide diverse combinations of social and economic ideology.

    Comparing the parties closest to representing authoritarian egalitarianism (social-right plus economic-left) and libertarianism (social-left plus economic-right), we observed a 0.9 SD intelligence gap.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 10:54:00 UTC

  • TWO PARTY SYSTEM NEUTRALIZES IQ DIFFERENCES • In both the U.S. and Denmark intel

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289618300060THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM NEUTRALIZES IQ DIFFERENCES

    • In both the U.S. and Denmark intelligence failed to predict standard party choice.

    • This was due to opposing effects of intelligence on economic and social ideology.

    •Denmark’s multi-party system allows non-standard representations of party choice.

    •In Denmark, significant systematic intelligence differences observed between parties.

    Intelligence is rarely studied as a predictor of vote choice, and at first glance our data supports this neglect: In samples from the U.S. and Denmark (Ns = 1419 and 953), intelligence does not predict the standard operationalization of vote choice in which parties are placed on a single left-vs-right dimension. (Standardized coefficients predicting right-wing vote choice were 0.05 and −0.03, respectively.)

    However, this apparent non-effect in fact reflects approximately equal and opposite effects of intelligence on vote choice as transmitted through social and economic ideology. In both countries, higher ability predicts left-wing social and right-wing economic views.

    The impact of intelligence on vote choice is thus most visible in true multi-party systems like Denmark, in which parties do not simply pair similar levels of social and economic conservatism, but instead provide diverse combinations of social and economic ideology.

    Comparing the parties closest to representing authoritarian egalitarianism (social-right plus economic-left) and libertarianism (social-left plus economic-right), we observed a 0.9 SD intelligence gap.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289618300060

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 10:54:00 UTC

  • Conservatives are more likely to use an adultery site than liberals, and liberta

    Conservatives are more likely to use an adultery site than liberals, and libertarians much more likely than Conservatives. Why?

    Um. Let me help y’all. It’s COSTS. For libertarians especially, and conservatives in general, interpersonal connections come at higher costs. These web sites effectively suggest that they offer opportunities at lower interpersonal COST. (All behavior is cost driven & costs vary.)

    Liberals are always on the market, and the price is cheap. Conservatives are on the market and the price is expensive, and libertarians are on the market and price is most expensive.

    (via Skye Stewart, via Rolf Degen)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 10:02:00 UTC

  • LANGUAGE CAUSES OVERESTIMATION OF SIMILARITIES We all have a will to power, but

    LANGUAGE CAUSES OVERESTIMATION OF SIMILARITIES

    We all have a will to power, but we also have physical, mental, and emotional resources to obtain it with; and that will is countered by fear and insecurity.

    Language is as natural as walking. But it causes us to overestimate our similarities. Empathy causes us to overestimate our similarities. Submission causes us to overestimate our similarities. Need causes us to overestimate our similarities. And a host of our cognitive biases evolved to convince us we are normal, or average, or like everyone else. But despite all those cognitive biases, we are demonstrably not all that similar in MARGINAL difference in the performance of emotional, cognitive, and physical tasks.

    We can often judge someone’s ability by their vocabulary and their reasoning – language is how we measure (diagnose) the mind. But the fact that we can speak to people across the human spectrum tells us nothing about our marginal (effective) differences.

    In fact, those cognitive biases for similarity(indifference) may be nothing other than an adaptation to the use of language, by providing us with greater imitation(of actions), sympathy(for wants), and empathy(for feelings), so that we more readily comprehend one another’s use of language so that in turn we may more readily reap the rewards of opportunities for the high returns on cooperation.

    The more Empathic, Sympathetic, Needful, and Vulnerable we are, the more incentive we have to find similarities (female) and the Dispassionate, Analytic, Independent, and Dominant we are the more incentive we have to identify and preserve our dissimilarities.

    Now think about that a little bit.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 08:22:00 UTC

  • Language Causes Overestimation of Similarities

    We all have a will to power, but we also have physical, mental, and emotional resources to obtain it with; and that will is countered by fear and insecurity. Language is as natural as walking. But it causes us to overestimate our similarities. Empathy causes us to overestimate our similarities. Submission causes us to overestimate our similarities. Need causes us to overestimate our similarities. And a host of our cognitive biases evolved to convince us we are normal, or average, or like everyone else. But despite all those cognitive biases, we are demonstrably not all that similar in MARGINAL difference in the performance of emotional, cognitive, and physical tasks. We can often judge someone’s ability by their vocabulary and their reasoning – language is how we measure (diagnose) the mind. But the fact that we can speak to people across the human spectrum tells us nothing about our marginal (effective) differences. In fact, those cognitive biases for similarity(indifference) may be nothing other than an adaptation to the use of language, by providing us with greater imitation(of actions), sympathy(for wants), and empathy(for feelings), so that we more readily comprehend one another’s use of language so that in turn we may more readily reap the rewards of opportunities for the high returns on cooperation. The more Empathic, Sympathetic, Needful, and Vulnerable we are, the more incentive we have to find similarities (female) and the Dispassionate, Analytic, Independent, and Dominant we are the more incentive we have to identify and preserve our dissimilarities. Now think about that a little bit.