Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • THE SPECTRUM OF REFERENTS WE CALL GODS I dunno. I think we just use the word ‘go

    THE SPECTRUM OF REFERENTS WE CALL GODS

    I dunno. I think we just use the word ‘god’ to represent increasingly poetic references. It’s the simple people for whom that poetry is existential and anthropomorphic, common people for whom it is literary, atheists who are in between (‘educated’) for whom it is pseudoscience or deceit, and the sophisticated people for whom it is poetry (aesthetic).

    I talk to my god every day. But my understanding of ‘god’ would to an atheist make sense, but be silly. To an ordinary person not refer to god at all, and to literalists be atheism.

    The reason people at the bottom are more attracted to the divine is to ‘know’ right action, feeling, and belief, and take comfort in right action, feeling, and belief, and therefore giving them confidence in right action, feeling, and belief – without being persuaded (manipulated) by those with greater abilities and lower ethics and morality. In other words, religions give people a shield against guilt, manipulation, coercion, and risk.

    Religion was successful because mindfulness(certainty, clarity, confidence) is increasingly necessary as you move left on the curve.

    I have been working on this question for I think three or four years now and the phenomenon is widespread, and not limited to religion, but philosophy, and the modern social pseudosciences, and even literature.

    We evolved in bands where the entire group functioned as a single distributed nervous system. We prospered by extending our numbers beyond our ability to perceive. So we needed rules (limits) and goods (objectives), and we eventually needed writing, numbers, money (prices really), and governments (commons), to coordinate our actions in large numbers.

    But while we gained increasingly diverse physical certainties, they came at the high cost of mental and emotional certainties. At this point we are comforted primarily by consumption and (at least in america) we are seeing extraordinary increases in suicide among the aged. So we are extremely ‘alone’. And as alone we search for some sort of membership and shared understanding, by which to obtain the certainty of our evolutionary history in bands.

    Hence the expansion of social media among the verbally acute.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-11 09:44:00 UTC

  • THE REASON FOR “PROGRESSIVE” CLASS INCREASES The lifting of the laboring and und

    THE REASON FOR “PROGRESSIVE” CLASS INCREASES The lifting of the laboring and underclasses from subsistence to consumption was made possible by the increases in relative productivity. In other words, we are simply wealthy enough that we can afford (for a time) to reverse four thousand years of the domestication of human groups, by the rapid expansion of th eunderclasses and their movement from rural agrarian marginal self-sustenance to Nothing occurred because of feminine (left’s) good intentions, but instead the left caused the consumption of increases in productivity as increases in population rather than the traditional western means of increasing the commons. People were not oppressed. They were domesticated, generation by generation like every other animal through harsh winters, manorialism (most important) and aggressive hanging of up to one percent of the population every year. The industrial revolution reversed the trend, and we have already lost one standard deviation in median intelligence in the much of the west through dysgenia. Cities are exacerbating the issue since they are IQ and ovary graveyards. This is just the data. It is what it is.

  • Your Warranty Of Due Diligence Is The Test Of Your Ethics

    Now, I’ll repeat here that there is a vast difference between telling a story and telling a series of stories. Just as there is a vast difference between a term, and a term from a series of terms. Just as there is a vast difference between a parable and its explanation (you’ll note that the victorians were certain to state the lessons of aesop’s fables in actionable prose). All of these techniques I use and advocate allow us to both narrate and give examples while continuously disambiguating (deflating, deconflating, de-fictionalizing) the narrative. I have my own narrative that is quite difficult to get across and that is just how central truth (testimony and agency ) are to western civ. And I do that by constant triangulation of examples. meaning is first, Justification is second, BUT WARRANTY OF DUE DILIGENCE IS THE RESULT OF DEFLATION. It does not matter what story you tell as long as after having achieved through association that which you now deflate via operation.

  • YOUR WARRANTY OF DUE DILIGENCE IS THE TEST OF YOUR ETHICS Now, I’ll repeat here

    YOUR WARRANTY OF DUE DILIGENCE IS THE TEST OF YOUR ETHICS

    Now, I’ll repeat here that there is a vast difference between telling a story and telling a series of stories. Just as there is a vast difference between a term, and a term from a series of terms. Just as there is a vast difference between a parable and its explanation (you’ll note that the victorians were certain to state the lessons of aesop’s fables in actionable prose).

    All of these techniques I use and advocate allow us to both narrate and give examples while continuously disambiguating (deflating, deconflating, de-fictionalizing) the narrative.

    I have my own narrative that is quite difficult to get across and that is just how central truth (testimony and agency ) are to western civ. And I do that by constant triangulation of examples.

    meaning is first, Justification is second, BUT WARRANTY OF DUE DILIGENCE IS THE RESULT OF DEFLATION.

    It does not matter what story you tell as long as after having achieved through association that which you now deflate via operation.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-10 11:22:00 UTC

  • Your Warranty Of Due Diligence Is The Test Of Your Ethics

    Now, I’ll repeat here that there is a vast difference between telling a story and telling a series of stories. Just as there is a vast difference between a term, and a term from a series of terms. Just as there is a vast difference between a parable and its explanation (you’ll note that the victorians were certain to state the lessons of aesop’s fables in actionable prose). All of these techniques I use and advocate allow us to both narrate and give examples while continuously disambiguating (deflating, deconflating, de-fictionalizing) the narrative. I have my own narrative that is quite difficult to get across and that is just how central truth (testimony and agency ) are to western civ. And I do that by constant triangulation of examples. meaning is first, Justification is second, BUT WARRANTY OF DUE DILIGENCE IS THE RESULT OF DEFLATION. It does not matter what story you tell as long as after having achieved through association that which you now deflate via operation.

  • (from elsewhere) The parable, the novel, the history, the economic history of th

    (from elsewhere) The parable, the novel, the history, the economic history of the world provide better understanding for those with the physical, emotional, and mental agency to act in accordance with the world. But many of us, perhaps all but a few of us, cannot tolerate our relationship with reality for the same reason 80% of people in any organization believe they are in the top 20% of people in that organization – the illusion is necessary to preserve mindfulness (fear of status-diminution). So like religions of old, philosophy provides a form of entertainment in which those lacking agency, because they lack ability, find a means of insulation from the confrontation of the dissonance between their social, sexual, economic, political, and military value. Philosophy is just pseudoscientific entertainment literature, just as was religion. All we have done is refine the language while retaining the underlying value of comforting falsehoods.

  • Why Are People Attracted To Socialism? Infantilism.

    It is because you begin with the child’s relationship to the parent (family), not the political relationship between families, clans, tribes, and nations. 1 – The first question of rational choice is “why don’t I commit suicide”. 2 – The first question of ethics, is, and always will be, “Why don’t I kill you and take your stuff?” 3 – The first question of politics, is, and always will be “why don’t me and mine, kill you and yours, and take your stuff. 4 – The first question of all relations is “why don’t I/we kill you/you(plural) and take your stuff?” It is only after answering the question, that we decide how we cooperate or not. TRANSFORMATION INTO ADULTHOOD VS INFANTILIZATION A female, a child, (and a beta male) all admit their weakness and irrelevance when they begin with the presumption of the value of cooperation. Cooperation is only valuable until it is not. Hence, as an advocate for the organizational model of the family, all of whom demonstrate kin selection, you are attracted to the extension of that kin selection outside of your kin, and to the socialist’s (child,female) strategy. You seek it as ideal for the underclass family (genetic inferiors) but is not the ideal for the middle and upper class family (genetic superiors). And the markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, and polities, are the means by which the competent evolve and the incompetent are removed from the gene pool – or at least, some equilibrium is maintained. Hence why those of us who exterminated our underclasses (east asians and western europeans) possess higher distributions in the middle and upper middle and the other groups possess lower distributions in the lower middle, and lower classes, and especially the extremely costly underclasses. So some of us are fully mature adults and understand this, and some of us are still infantilized (or coddled) and do not. The strong and able need a reason not to kill, enslave, enserf the weak and less able. And markets and rule of law, are the only means by which it is more profitable to cooperate for all than for the strong and able to enserf, enslave, prey upon, or kill the weak and unable. It takes about .001% of the male population to alter the political order. Socialism provides the incentive for the strong to defeat the weak. The only reason socialism had any footing whatsoever is that the christian peoples have a desperate desire to virtue signal their magnanimity – as a means of imitating their ancestral nobility. Everywhere even the most feeble attempt has been tried, the outcome has been cyclical degeneration of knowledge, craft, economy, norm, and tradition. Just as religions produced a cyclical degeneration of the same. Thus endeth the lesson.

  • WHY ARE PEOPLE ATTRACTED TO SOCIALISM? INFANTILISM. It is because you begin with

    WHY ARE PEOPLE ATTRACTED TO SOCIALISM? INFANTILISM.

    It is because you begin with the child’s relationship to the parent (family), not the political relationship between families, clans, tribes, and nations.

    1 – The first question of rational choice is “why don’t I commit suicide”.

    2 – The first question of ethics, is, and always will be, “Why don’t I kill you and take your stuff?”

    3 – The first question of politics, is, and always will be “why don’t me and mine, kill you and yours, and take your stuff.

    4 – The first question of all relations is “why don’t I/we kill you/you(plural) and take your stuff?”

    It is only after answering the question, that we decide how we cooperate or not.

    TRANSFORMATION INTO ADULTHOOD VS INFANTILIZATION

    A female, a child, (and a beta male) all admit their weakness and irrelevance when they begin with the presumption of the value of cooperation.

    Cooperation is only valuable until it is not.

    Hence, as an advocate for the organizational model of the family, all of whom demonstrate kin selection, you are attracted to the extension of that kin selection outside of your kin, and to the socialist’s (child,female) strategy.

    You seek it as ideal for the underclass family (genetic inferiors) but is not the ideal for the middle and upper class family (genetic superiors).

    And the markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, and polities, are the means by which the competent evolve and the incompetent are removed from the gene pool – or at least, some equilibrium is maintained. Hence why those of us who exterminated our underclasses (east asians and western europeans) possess higher distributions in the middle and upper middle and the other groups possess lower distributions in the lower middle, and lower classes, and especially the extremely costly underclasses.

    So some of us are fully mature adults and understand this, and some of us are still infantilized (or coddled) and do not.

    The strong and able need a reason not to kill, enslave, enserf the weak and less able. And markets and rule of law, are the only means by which it is more profitable to cooperate for all than for the strong and able to enserf, enslave, prey upon, or kill the weak and unable.

    It takes about .001% of the male population to alter the political order. Socialism provides the incentive for the strong to defeat the weak. The only reason socialism had any footing whatsoever is that the christian peoples have a desperate desire to virtue signal their magnanimity – as a means of imitating their ancestral nobility.

    Everywhere even the most feeble attempt has been tried, the outcome has been cyclical degeneration of knowledge, craft, economy, norm, and tradition. Just as religions produced a cyclical degeneration of the same.

    Thus endeth the lesson.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-10 09:58:00 UTC

  • Why Are People Attracted To Socialism? Infantilism.

    It is because you begin with the child’s relationship to the parent (family), not the political relationship between families, clans, tribes, and nations. 1 – The first question of rational choice is “why don’t I commit suicide”. 2 – The first question of ethics, is, and always will be, “Why don’t I kill you and take your stuff?” 3 – The first question of politics, is, and always will be “why don’t me and mine, kill you and yours, and take your stuff. 4 – The first question of all relations is “why don’t I/we kill you/you(plural) and take your stuff?” It is only after answering the question, that we decide how we cooperate or not. TRANSFORMATION INTO ADULTHOOD VS INFANTILIZATION A female, a child, (and a beta male) all admit their weakness and irrelevance when they begin with the presumption of the value of cooperation. Cooperation is only valuable until it is not. Hence, as an advocate for the organizational model of the family, all of whom demonstrate kin selection, you are attracted to the extension of that kin selection outside of your kin, and to the socialist’s (child,female) strategy. You seek it as ideal for the underclass family (genetic inferiors) but is not the ideal for the middle and upper class family (genetic superiors). And the markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production, commons, and polities, are the means by which the competent evolve and the incompetent are removed from the gene pool – or at least, some equilibrium is maintained. Hence why those of us who exterminated our underclasses (east asians and western europeans) possess higher distributions in the middle and upper middle and the other groups possess lower distributions in the lower middle, and lower classes, and especially the extremely costly underclasses. So some of us are fully mature adults and understand this, and some of us are still infantilized (or coddled) and do not. The strong and able need a reason not to kill, enslave, enserf the weak and less able. And markets and rule of law, are the only means by which it is more profitable to cooperate for all than for the strong and able to enserf, enslave, prey upon, or kill the weak and unable. It takes about .001% of the male population to alter the political order. Socialism provides the incentive for the strong to defeat the weak. The only reason socialism had any footing whatsoever is that the christian peoples have a desperate desire to virtue signal their magnanimity – as a means of imitating their ancestral nobility. Everywhere even the most feeble attempt has been tried, the outcome has been cyclical degeneration of knowledge, craft, economy, norm, and tradition. Just as religions produced a cyclical degeneration of the same. Thus endeth the lesson.

  • OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS : The literary mind still struggles to find place in m

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ea4mEnsTv6Q OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS : The literary mind still struggles to find place in modernity. As Weber could foresee all life is increasingly reduced from intuition to calculation. Overcoming our cognitive bias: 1 – “Markets” (competition between opportunities and limits) describe the behavior of the hemispheres. 2 – We struggle to overcome justificationism (the narrative of moraliy and religion) instead of competition and markets (survival, and the competition between imagination and falsification). 3 – Justification developed as did grammar: storytelling (describing) 4 – Cost is missing from morality, philosophy, religion. This is why thinkers in those fields remain backward (late medieval), Evolutionary constraints: 0 – lateralization of the nervous system was necessary for cost reasons. 1 – consequential specialization was necessary for cost reasons. 2 – opportunity (right) cost (left) = predators(right) prey (left) 3 – competition between opportunity generation and constraint (costs, limits). “Kuhn etc;” 1 – a paradigm consist of a network of constant relations. All changes in knowledge consist of reorganizing constant relations in memory, to respond to newly identified constant relations, and pruning and growing new relations. It is our failure to speak in constant relations between states, and our reliance on storytelling (literary analogy) … a problem of literary vocabulary. “Unstable Position”: 1 – Market maximization. people prefer and benefit from operating at the maximum of their capacity to obtain successful reinforcement. This is just an example of neural economics at work. THE LITERARY(conflationary) VS THE OPERATIONAL(deflationary) The language of artificial intelligence and cognitive science avoids the ‘pseudoscientific literature’ of psychology. Even if it is more enjoyable to learn through literature (storytelling). Why? Operations (measurements) vs mere verbal associations (conflations). There is far more to be said about why one prefers the literary (philosophical and psychological) rather than the scientific (operational) and economic (equilibrial) than is to be learned by the study of philosophy and psychology. However, the literary conveys to the speaker and the audience greater confidence in these fictions than exists in practice. This is not so important when we are discussing the conversion of philosophy and psychology to science. It is however, more important in preventing the use of loading, framing, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit, that is the vehicle by which old world abrahamism (judaism, christianity, islam) and new world arahamism (neoconservatism, libertarianism, marxism, postmodernism, and feminism) have been successful in undermining the ancient and modern worlds. OMG. The rest of the talk descends into the literary equivalent of gossip. Such drama. THE UNIVERSE IS VERY, VERY SIMPLE. All human life is very very simple. The human mind is very simple. And the current or coming completion of the enlightenment (interrupted by the abrahamic dark ages) will end this pseudoscientific nonsense in the economic, political, social, and psychological, just as it ended it in the physical. Finally. ALthough I have no doubt that we will see another generation of Marx’s Freud’s Baoz’s Cantor’s creating a new literary fantasy – another moral fictional literature under another guise.