Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • THE INVERSION OF THE IQ CONTROVERSY The IQ Controversy misses the point that it

    THE INVERSION OF THE IQ CONTROVERSY

    The IQ Controversy misses the point that it is not so much exceptional ability, which exists in all groups, that is so demonstrably advantageous for the GROUP, but the relative absence of lack of ability at the bottom end that is advantageous for the group. In other words, one can raise the average IQ of a group by trying to increase the number at the top, despite regression to the mean, or one can reduce the number at the bottom thereby changing the mean to which populations regress. And while we now know that lower intelligence is the product of accumulated defects, and that higher intelligence is the produce of eliminating defects, not necessarily any particular gain, the problem should be fairly obvious in that the greatest investment peoples can make in their present and future is the suppression of reproduction in the lower classes in exchange for redistribution.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-20 10:37:00 UTC

  • Some Of Us Must Be Generals

    Some people bail water to relieve the pressure of the flood. Some people scribe a crack in the dam and let the sheer weight of the water do its work. Almost all people on the right are the former kind, and I am the latter. Western civilization unconsciously, out of habit, solves problems early, honestly, directly, and openly – as is necessary among a militia of peers. However, this is not how one conducts war. A general does not seek valor, heroism, and sacrifice as much as indirection, asymmetry of conditions, and supply lines, during which valor, sacrifice, and heroism are obtained at least expense. I’ve been criticized for my contra-populism for years and the reason is quite simple – populists bail water of immediacy, and generals simply identify all the dams, and where to scribe them so they break of their own accord, with the deluge doing the hard labor while we watch the destruction. We have to do very little because the tolerance for non kin is the product of wealth and order. If we remove the wealth and order, then the tolerance, like the dam will end, and the natural pressure of the conflict will produce deterministic ends. The enemy always has the numbers. We did not conquer and rule the world because of our numbers, or our valor, but our social order, and our technology.

  • Some Of Us Must Be Generals

    Some people bail water to relieve the pressure of the flood. Some people scribe a crack in the dam and let the sheer weight of the water do its work. Almost all people on the right are the former kind, and I am the latter. Western civilization unconsciously, out of habit, solves problems early, honestly, directly, and openly – as is necessary among a militia of peers. However, this is not how one conducts war. A general does not seek valor, heroism, and sacrifice as much as indirection, asymmetry of conditions, and supply lines, during which valor, sacrifice, and heroism are obtained at least expense. I’ve been criticized for my contra-populism for years and the reason is quite simple – populists bail water of immediacy, and generals simply identify all the dams, and where to scribe them so they break of their own accord, with the deluge doing the hard labor while we watch the destruction. We have to do very little because the tolerance for non kin is the product of wealth and order. If we remove the wealth and order, then the tolerance, like the dam will end, and the natural pressure of the conflict will produce deterministic ends. The enemy always has the numbers. We did not conquer and rule the world because of our numbers, or our valor, but our social order, and our technology.

  • ( I am an american citizen. I have been writing patriotic advocacy since the ear

    ( I am an american citizen. I have been writing patriotic advocacy since the early 1980s. I have an employee record as a member of the justice department, a long tax history, a long business history, and a contract with ‘the state department’ for certain unspecified services for which I would not have been permitted if I was other than a patriot. I use my real name. I say everything in the open. My objective is patriotic and in defense of the constitution. My purpose is to restore that constitution to its original intent by providing the means of strictly constructing natural law. I do not participate in or encourage direct action only counsel on what I understand is a deterministic future conflict due to deterministic, uncontrollable, conflicts of interest. I don’t ‘hate’ on anyone – I criticize all peoples equally. And I have done all this intentionally. When dam is going to break of its own natural accord, some of us plan for it, some of us scribe it so it breaks where its optimum, and some of us figure out what to do with the pressure released, so that it produces some form of good. I am absolutely certain that a very large percentage of the population will at least appreciate, if not advocate, the legal, political, and economic solutions I recommend -and that any who don’t, will self-select as identifiable criminals engaged in conspiracy and fraud – even if only conspiracy and fraud of ignorance and convenience. )

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-19 17:37:00 UTC

  • Some people bail water to relieve the pressure of the flood. Some people scribe

    Some people bail water to relieve the pressure of the flood. Some people scribe a crack in the dam and let the sheer weight of the water do its work.

    Almost all people on the right are the former kind, and I am the latter.

    Western civilization unconsciously, out of habit, solves problems early, honestly, directly, and openly – as is necessary among a militia of peers.

    However, this is not how one conducts war. A general does not seek valor, heroism, and sacrifice as much as indirection, asymmetry of conditions, and supply lines, during which valor, sacrifice, and heroism are obtained at least expense.

    I’ve been criticized for my contra-populism for years and the reason is quite simple – populists bail water of immediacy, and generals simply identify all the dams, and where to scribe them so they break of their own accord, with the deluge doing the hard labor while we watch the destruction.

    We have to do very little because the tolerance for non kin is the product of wealth and order. If we remove the wealth and order, then the tolerance, like the dam will end, and the natural pressure of the conflict will produce deterministic ends.

    The enemy always has the numbers. We did not conquer and rule the world because of our numbers, or our valor, but our social order, and our technology.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-19 10:59:00 UTC

  • MALE AND FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE COGNITIVE BIASES Science helps us in matters of mut

    MALE AND FEMALE REPRODUCTIVE COGNITIVE BIASES

    Science helps us in matters of mutual misunderstanding between men and women (Or the male brain and female brain):

    1) There is a female, genetic, cognitive bias, toward Solipsism, or what women generally refer to as “personalizing” an argument;

    2) Just as there is a related female, genetic, cognitive bias to argue the person rather than the argument;

    3) just as there is a related female genetic, cognitive bias to NAXALT (“not all x are like that”) – which is the failure to intuit the difference between a distribution (curve) and equality (line);

    4) Just as there is a related female genetic cognitive bias to conflate the desirable/undesirable, with the good/true.

    And… you are demonstrating all those female, genetic, cognitive biases that evolution gave you, so that you would protect your children from any form of outcasting (negative differentiation, boycott) that would limit their chances of prosperity – or even survival.

    I am not a woman, with solipsistic cognitive biases for the purpose of protecting my offspring, but a man, with analytic cognitive biases for the purpose of maintaining or increasing the competitive capacity of the tribe that consists of my brothers our mates, and offspring.

    As such while it is in your reproductive interest to be ‘confused’ to some degree, it is in my reproductive interests to not be. You cannot afford to fail to grasp the world of threats to your offspring as it is, just as I cannot afford to fail grasp the world of threats to my tribe as it is.

    Ergo, I don’t confuse the good/bad with the true/false, nor make the mistake of equality vs distribution, nor deny the overwhelming evidence of demonstrated human nature (prostitution vs war) throughout all of human and pre-human history.

    What I understand you to be saying is that you do not want the public to hold a low opinion of women like you because it would put you at an even greater status disadvantage than you had been in the past. And that I can understand.

    But conversely, I don’t make the mistake of saying that because males disproportionately commit violent crime, that there is any chance I will commit violent crime. Nor would I say it was bad or false to say that they do so. Truth is truth. Period.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-19 05:21:00 UTC

  • The Flynn Effect Explained

    0) We don’t have IQ tests from 1830 (the beginning of the revolution). Only response tests from later in the 1800’s. 1) the response tests have dropped. (I am still fussing about this one), and response time is pretty much a proxy for iq (which in an age of neural networks we should understand is obvious). 2) The flynn effect has stopped and now reversed. 3) All the gains were at the bottom of the distribution, and the top has remained the same or decreased. (age confirms it) 4) The differences are not in g-loaded parts of the tests, and g-loaded parts are unchanged. 5) Relative positioning remains constant: —“While the secular gains are on g-loaded tests (such as the Wechsler), they are negatively correlated with the most g-loaded components of those tests. Also, the tests lose their g loadedness over time with training, retesting, and familiarity. In an analysis of mathematics and reading scores from tests such as the NAEP and Coleman Report over the last 54 years, we show that there has been no narrowing of the gap in either IQ scores or in educational achievement. From 1954 to 2008, Black 17-year-olds have consistently scored at about the level of White 14-year-olds, yielding IQ equivale”—- 6) We do in fact get a bit better with practice. Not a lot better but better enough to reduce volatility, which would not improve test coverage, but reduce error in tests performed. In other words we aren’t smarter we reduce errors. 7) General knowledge ‘saturation’ produces patterns involuntarily that has to be learned intentionally (or by reading) as in the past. HOWERVER As I understand it, people are ‘smarter in general’ for the simple reason that by ‘thinking scientifically’ we in fact are training ourselves to apply general rules. In other words, people at the turn of the century were more likely to think in instance-rules and commands, than general rules, and we have in fact gotten better at the use of general rules. Hence why I am an advocate for the German and English Languages, and in particular operational language, because I am certain that the same gains will be produced as were produced by scientific thought (general rules). Ergo, this is much scarier: that means some ideas not only make us dumber, they imprison us in dumbness. MORE LATER.

  • The Flynn Effect Explained

    0) We don’t have IQ tests from 1830 (the beginning of the revolution). Only response tests from later in the 1800’s. 1) the response tests have dropped. (I am still fussing about this one), and response time is pretty much a proxy for iq (which in an age of neural networks we should understand is obvious). 2) The flynn effect has stopped and now reversed. 3) All the gains were at the bottom of the distribution, and the top has remained the same or decreased. (age confirms it) 4) The differences are not in g-loaded parts of the tests, and g-loaded parts are unchanged. 5) Relative positioning remains constant: —“While the secular gains are on g-loaded tests (such as the Wechsler), they are negatively correlated with the most g-loaded components of those tests. Also, the tests lose their g loadedness over time with training, retesting, and familiarity. In an analysis of mathematics and reading scores from tests such as the NAEP and Coleman Report over the last 54 years, we show that there has been no narrowing of the gap in either IQ scores or in educational achievement. From 1954 to 2008, Black 17-year-olds have consistently scored at about the level of White 14-year-olds, yielding IQ equivale”—- 6) We do in fact get a bit better with practice. Not a lot better but better enough to reduce volatility, which would not improve test coverage, but reduce error in tests performed. In other words we aren’t smarter we reduce errors. 7) General knowledge ‘saturation’ produces patterns involuntarily that has to be learned intentionally (or by reading) as in the past. HOWERVER As I understand it, people are ‘smarter in general’ for the simple reason that by ‘thinking scientifically’ we in fact are training ourselves to apply general rules. In other words, people at the turn of the century were more likely to think in instance-rules and commands, than general rules, and we have in fact gotten better at the use of general rules. Hence why I am an advocate for the German and English Languages, and in particular operational language, because I am certain that the same gains will be produced as were produced by scientific thought (general rules). Ergo, this is much scarier: that means some ideas not only make us dumber, they imprison us in dumbness. MORE LATER.

  • Economics of Neural Networks

    Any “general rule of arbitrary precision” must include a limit (time delineation) in order to categorize and test an outcome(consequence), since we may categorize consequences at any point in the time line in which actionable or deducible constant relations are identifiable. In other words, searches for prediction of futures are change (state) dependent. This may be heavy but it means that your prediction of future events from any state may vary by the utility you prefer. We must operate by general rules (categories) because that is all we can act upon (a concentration of constant relations during which we can effect a change in state.) We all bias our utility (judgements) on similar timelines if not only due to ability, but also on commensurability. Ergo, we develop out of necessity time preferences and the more expertise we develop in any time frame the more related (dependent) associations we develop in concert. This isn’t just choice it’s the economics of neural networks, and that economics is no different from the ‘economics’ of physics, biology, and sentience. (for Andy Curzon) Apr 18, 2018 9:59am

  • Economics of Neural Networks

    Any “general rule of arbitrary precision” must include a limit (time delineation) in order to categorize and test an outcome(consequence), since we may categorize consequences at any point in the time line in which actionable or deducible constant relations are identifiable. In other words, searches for prediction of futures are change (state) dependent. This may be heavy but it means that your prediction of future events from any state may vary by the utility you prefer. We must operate by general rules (categories) because that is all we can act upon (a concentration of constant relations during which we can effect a change in state.) We all bias our utility (judgements) on similar timelines if not only due to ability, but also on commensurability. Ergo, we develop out of necessity time preferences and the more expertise we develop in any time frame the more related (dependent) associations we develop in concert. This isn’t just choice it’s the economics of neural networks, and that economics is no different from the ‘economics’ of physics, biology, and sentience. (for Andy Curzon) Apr 18, 2018 9:59am