Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • You don’t know that your genes are speaking out of self defensive panic. I know

    You don’t know that your genes are speaking out of self defensive panic. I know mine are speaking. But then, scientific (operational) truth is in in my genetic interest.

    Technically speaking we cannot measure IQ reliably above 140. What we can do however, is group people in a distribution above 140 – and that appears to work fairly accurately. (Although, we tend to specialize in certain categories of thought.)

    EQ is pseudoscience. All demonstrated intelligence increases and decreases constantly. The difference between our behaviors is easily measurable and attributable to personality differences (values). In particular some people have higher or lower agreeableness and conscientiousness, and higher or lower neuroticism – and higher or lower agency as a consequence. Most of these differences are the result of what we call male(autistic) vs female(psychotic) brain structures developed in-utero (and possibly early post-partum) and at present we can measure them reasonably accurately.

    And each of those personality traits corresponds to variations in the (few) reward systems. And each of those reward systems corresponds to a phase of the prey drive. With the difference between the genders as significant biases.

    Now, if we add into this set of variables (a) sexual, (b) social, and (d) economic market values, we find that those that are more valuable almost always take conservative (asset preservation) strategies, while those less valuable with less agency take progressive (consumption) strategies.

    Now, whether someone’s opinion makes you feel offended, insecure, or inadequate, is simply your genes telling you that it’s true, and to change your social group to improve your market value.

    And no, I have no contempt for normies. But ALL OF US at the upper end, have developmental (Childhood) challenges growing up with ‘normies’ who tend to ostracize us, without realizing that (a) we must mature more slowly, and (b) they will inevitably end up working for us in one way or another.

    So the point of my post (and most posts I make on this topic) is that it an economic advantage to be gifted, but it is not necessarily one that makes you happier. In fact, the evidence continues to accumulate that the opposite is true.

    We are all victims of the normies so to speak: which is another way of saying that those of us who grasp history are doomed to be the victims of those who do not.

    Sorry. It’s that simple.

    (So I know your virtue signalling is self defensive, but that doesn’t make it any less obviously a lack of agency, and a failure to mature into adulthood. The purpose of the postmodern revolution was to relieve the infantilized mind of the pressures of competition in modernity when freed of the criticism that they were just poor. Unfortunately, the poor were poor deservedly, and the postmodern underclasses are still underclasses that can just spend money because their betters have made all consumer goods and services infinitely cheaper.)

    ——— IN RESPONSE TO——

    —“Can you tell the difference between someone with and IQ of 145, and one at 165 just by speaking to them? Probably not.

    But you would notice a massive difference between the one that had the equivalent EQ, and the one without, very quickly.

    The difference I’ve observed in people of this mental make up is that there is almost a desperation to be noticed as smart in some, whereas, the truly intelligent people I know have no cares whether it’s noticed in them or not. They won’t correct someone, they won’t manoeuvre the conversation to walk into a topic so they can show off. They certainly won’t brag about it online.

    There is an underlying contentment, and confidence that appears in people like this. Or should I say “us”?

    I thought, perhaps, that I was reading into your post too much. The last paragraph, however, only signals a real contempt for the “normies”. You’re too busy “Se lancer des fleurs”, as the French say, to realise the only people that care about how smart you are are you, and your parents. Other people can appreciate it, but nobody really cares – especially on the internet.

    Here is something you can try. Why don’t you just swap the topic of your answer from intelligence, to physical attractiveness, and see how repulsively it would read. Maybe that will give you a hint as to why its an unbecoming way to carry yourself.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-20 12:57:00 UTC

  • You don’t know that your genes are speaking out of self defensive panic. I know

    You don’t know that your genes are speaking out of self defensive panic. I know mine are speaking. But then, scientific (operational) truth is in in my genetic interest. Technically speaking we cannot measure IQ reliably above 140. What we can do however, is group people in a distribution above 140 – and that appears to work fairly accurately. (Although, we tend to specialize in certain categories of thought.) EQ is pseudoscience. All demonstrated intelligence increases and decreases constantly. The difference between our behaviors is easily measurable and attributable to personality differences (values). In particular some people have higher or lower agreeableness and conscientiousness, and higher or lower neuroticism – and higher or lower agency as a consequence. Most of these differences are the result of what we call male(autistic) vs female(psychotic) brain structures developed in-utero (and possibly early post-partum) and at present we can measure them reasonably accurately. And each of those personality traits corresponds to variations in the (few) reward systems. And each of those reward systems corresponds to a phase of the prey drive. With the difference between the genders as significant biases. Now, if we add into this set of variables (a) sexual, (b) social, and (d) economic market values, we find that those that are more valuable almost always take conservative (asset preservation) strategies, while those less valuable with less agency take progressive (consumption) strategies. Now, whether someone’s opinion makes you feel offended, insecure, or inadequate, is simply your genes telling you that it’s true, and to change your social group to improve your market value. And no, I have no contempt for normies. But ALL OF US at the upper end, have developmental (Childhood) challenges growing up with ‘normies’ who tend to ostracize us, without realizing that (a) we must mature more slowly, and (b) they will inevitably end up working for us in one way or another. So the point of my post (and most posts I make on this topic) is that it an economic advantage to be gifted, but it is not necessarily one that makes you happier. In fact, the evidence continues to accumulate that the opposite is true. We are all victims of the normies so to speak: which is another way of saying that those of us who grasp history are doomed to be the victims of those who do not. Sorry. It’s that simple. (So I know your virtue signalling is self defensive, but that doesn’t make it any less obviously a lack of agency, and a failure to mature into adulthood. The purpose of the postmodern revolution was to relieve the infantilized mind of the pressures of competition in modernity when freed of the criticism that they were just poor. Unfortunately, the poor were poor deservedly, and the postmodern underclasses are still underclasses that can just spend money because their betters have made all consumer goods and services infinitely cheaper.) ——— IN RESPONSE TO—— —“Can you tell the difference between someone with and IQ of 145, and one at 165 just by speaking to them? Probably not. But you would notice a massive difference between the one that had the equivalent EQ, and the one without, very quickly. The difference I’ve observed in people of this mental make up is that there is almost a desperation to be noticed as smart in some, whereas, the truly intelligent people I know have no cares whether it’s noticed in them or not. They won’t correct someone, they won’t manoeuvre the conversation to walk into a topic so they can show off. They certainly won’t brag about it online. There is an underlying contentment, and confidence that appears in people like this. Or should I say “us”? I thought, perhaps, that I was reading into your post too much. The last paragraph, however, only signals a real contempt for the “normies”. You’re too busy “Se lancer des fleurs”, as the French say, to realise the only people that care about how smart you are are you, and your parents. Other people can appreciate it, but nobody really cares – especially on the internet. Here is something you can try. Why don’t you just swap the topic of your answer from intelligence, to physical attractiveness, and see how repulsively it would read. Maybe that will give you a hint as to why its an unbecoming way to carry yourself.”—

  • The Fragility Is Obvious

    I knew it was around 90 people. I knew where it was being run from, but I didn’t know it only cost 2M to cause those antifa riots. Every time some idiot tells me that we cant force a revolution, I just want to say “How f–king ignorant are you?” It’s trivial. It’s terribly trivial. And it’s terribly cheap. We have never been this fragile before. Not even leading up to the civil war. Imagine if the fellows in Charlottesville had decided to stand their ground? That would have done it right there. The police cannot do anything. And once that revoluton starts, it just spirals. Why do you think they’ve been planning for it since the Clinton Administration? Because it’s deterministic.

  • FRAGILITY IS OBVIOUS I knew it was around 90 people. I knew where it was being r

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/02/18/the-russian-journalist-who-helped-uncover-election-meddling-is-confounded-by-the-mueller-indictments/?utm_term=.ddc87fe923ddTHE FRAGILITY IS OBVIOUS

    I knew it was around 90 people. I knew where it was being run from, but I didn’t know it only cost 2M to cause those antifa riots.

    Every time some idiot tells me that we cant force a revolution, I just want to say “How f–king ignorant are you?” It’s trivial. It’s terribly trivial. And it’s terribly cheap. We have never been this fragile before. Not even leading up to the civil war.

    Imagine if the fellows in Charlottesville had decided to stand their ground?

    That would have done it right there. The police cannot do anything. And once that revoluton starts, it just spirals.

    Why do you think they’ve been planning for it since the Clinton Administration?

    Because it’s deterministic.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-19 13:12:00 UTC

  • The Fragility Is Obvious

    I knew it was around 90 people. I knew where it was being run from, but I didn’t know it only cost 2M to cause those antifa riots. Every time some idiot tells me that we cant force a revolution, I just want to say “How f–king ignorant are you?” It’s trivial. It’s terribly trivial. And it’s terribly cheap. We have never been this fragile before. Not even leading up to the civil war. Imagine if the fellows in Charlottesville had decided to stand their ground? That would have done it right there. The police cannot do anything. And once that revoluton starts, it just spirals. Why do you think they’ve been planning for it since the Clinton Administration? Because it’s deterministic.

  • The State Of The Science

    The evidence exists, however, the causes are more obvious: 1) **the size of the underclasses. **and **2) neotonic(pedomorphic) evolution – meaning the retention of childhood features, **and 3)** transfer of female verbal acuity to males because of pedomorphic evolution.** Cold Climates, Agrarianism, Manorialism, and the raw Capital Costs of Tools (metals) needed to survive in those conditions, in addition to the aggressive hanging of the underclasses for more than a thousand years, allowed both upward redistribution of calories and reproduction, and the downward population of labor by the middle genetic classes. So by the time of the industrial revolution (if not the literacy revolution) europe (and west asia) had vast stores of underutilized human capital. However, both had to break free of the church and the bureaucracy which had made the vast majority of capital “dead” (static) and in support of rent seeking (church bureaucracy and chinese imperial bureaucracy). For the rest of the world, they have been unsuccessful at one or both of two factors: either (a) decimating the underclasses, and (b) developing deflationary grammars (methods) in the sequence math, logics, reason, empirical law (tort), and science. West europeans and east asians and ashkenazi were able to limit the size of their underclasses and to force upward redistribution of reproduction. East asians have the highest Neoteny, West Europeans, and then Ashkenazi. And less visible testosterone levels to equal more visible morphology(features). This is the primary difference between the races and subraces: Degree of neoteny, and distribution of male and female traits (brain structures) between the genders. Strangely enough, in the Ashkenazi they have nearly reversed it. Which is why they have such exceptional verbal (if not spatial) skills. So that’s the state of the science as I understand it. in other words, the greatest material differences are driven by the size of the underclasses, and therefore the median distribution in the gene pool, and therefore the language, norms, traditions, and institutions necessary or the persistence of such a gene pool with such a distribution. All of this is very simple. The marxist-postmodernist-feminist attempt at the second dark age – this time of pseudoscience – just made us lose a century and a half to their deceptions.

  • THE STATE OF THE SCIENCE The evidence exists, however, the causes are more obvio

    THE STATE OF THE SCIENCE

    The evidence exists, however, the causes are more obvious: 1) **the size of the underclasses. **and **2) neotonic(pedomorphic) evolution – meaning the retention of childhood features, **and 3)** transfer of female verbal acuity to males because of pedomorphic evolution.**

    Cold Climates, Agrarianism, Manorialism, and the raw Capital Costs of Tools (metals) needed to survive in those conditions, in addition to the aggressive hanging of the underclasses for more than a thousand years, allowed both upward redistribution of calories and reproduction, and the downward population of labor by the middle genetic classes.

    So by the time of the industrial revolution (if not the literacy revolution) europe (and west asia) had vast stores of underutilized human capital. However, both had to break free of the church and the bureaucracy which had made the vast majority of capital “dead” (static) and in support of rent seeking (church bureaucracy and chinese imperial bureaucracy).

    For the rest of the world, they have been unsuccessful at one or both of two factors: either (a) decimating the underclasses, and (b) developing deflationary grammars (methods) in the sequence math, logics, reason, empirical law (tort), and science.

    West europeans and east asians and ashkenazi were able to limit the size of their underclasses and to force upward redistribution of reproduction. East asians have the highest Neoteny, West Europeans, and then Ashkenazi. And less visible testosterone levels to equal more visible morphology(features).

    This is the primary difference between the races and subraces: Degree of neoteny, and distribution of male and female traits (brain structures) between the genders. Strangely enough, in the Ashkenazi they have nearly reversed it. Which is why they have such exceptional verbal (if not spatial) skills.

    So that’s the state of the science as I understand it.

    in other words, the greatest material differences are driven by the size of the underclasses, and therefore the median distribution in the gene pool, and therefore the language, norms, traditions, and institutions necessary or the persistence of such a gene pool with such a distribution.

    All of this is very simple. The marxist-postmodernist-feminist attempt at the second dark age – this time of pseudoscience – just made us lose a century and a half to their deceptions.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-18 11:55:00 UTC

  • The State Of The Science

    The evidence exists, however, the causes are more obvious: 1) **the size of the underclasses. **and **2) neotonic(pedomorphic) evolution – meaning the retention of childhood features, **and 3)** transfer of female verbal acuity to males because of pedomorphic evolution.** Cold Climates, Agrarianism, Manorialism, and the raw Capital Costs of Tools (metals) needed to survive in those conditions, in addition to the aggressive hanging of the underclasses for more than a thousand years, allowed both upward redistribution of calories and reproduction, and the downward population of labor by the middle genetic classes. So by the time of the industrial revolution (if not the literacy revolution) europe (and west asia) had vast stores of underutilized human capital. However, both had to break free of the church and the bureaucracy which had made the vast majority of capital “dead” (static) and in support of rent seeking (church bureaucracy and chinese imperial bureaucracy). For the rest of the world, they have been unsuccessful at one or both of two factors: either (a) decimating the underclasses, and (b) developing deflationary grammars (methods) in the sequence math, logics, reason, empirical law (tort), and science. West europeans and east asians and ashkenazi were able to limit the size of their underclasses and to force upward redistribution of reproduction. East asians have the highest Neoteny, West Europeans, and then Ashkenazi. And less visible testosterone levels to equal more visible morphology(features). This is the primary difference between the races and subraces: Degree of neoteny, and distribution of male and female traits (brain structures) between the genders. Strangely enough, in the Ashkenazi they have nearly reversed it. Which is why they have such exceptional verbal (if not spatial) skills. So that’s the state of the science as I understand it. in other words, the greatest material differences are driven by the size of the underclasses, and therefore the median distribution in the gene pool, and therefore the language, norms, traditions, and institutions necessary or the persistence of such a gene pool with such a distribution. All of this is very simple. The marxist-postmodernist-feminist attempt at the second dark age – this time of pseudoscience – just made us lose a century and a half to their deceptions.

  • What Type Of Abnormal Abilities Do You Have When You Have An Extremely High Iq?

    We process much more information. That’s the major difference. In general you want a big round head, a lot of neural density, and the lowest possible friction of transmission (white matter).

    In addition to processing more information we often identify increasingly subtle (more remote) patterns.

    And because of this we can work longer at learning – and some of us (I am certainly one of them) feel anxiety, depression, or pain if we are not learning. So not only can we learn more faster, but we can learn more because we can learn more hours per day.

    The more information we have, the more remote the patterns we see, the more we rely on that information and the less on intuition, norm, tradition, and the opinions and ideas of others.

    Additionally, some people have better short term memories and can hold larger static models. ( Hawking is a great example, but so are many others). I do not have this particular ability and I find that it is what differentiates me from the people who are above me.

    Additionally some people have superior verbal abilities and can describe what they think of more accessibly. (Noam Chomsky is smarter than I am, in both short term memory and verbal ability, and rarely loses his place no matter how convoluted the conversational route. )

    Some of us have more discipline, more conscientiousness, and skepticism and we’re possibly more autistic (which is the result of high neuronal density anyway), and we simply make fewer errors than others. This is very rare.

    We mature at different rates. Some of us have exceptional abilities in childhood and have nervous breakdowns when we reach young adulthood. (This is a subject I study now and then.) Others mature normally. Others of us mature more slowly.

    Normies are quite frustrating really. I had the great fortune to have a very old professor of contract law, who told me my sophomore year that “The world is not meant for us. It is meant for them. We are prisoners of their world. And the best we can do is help them through it.” And I found that advice to be profoundly useful in ending the the feeling that normies run the world, like children at a birthday party running with scissors. 😉

    https://www.quora.com/What-type-of-abnormal-abilities-do-you-have-when-you-have-an-extremely-high-IQ

  • How Will Iq Skeptics And Social Justice Advocates React If Genome Wide Association Studies Find Strong Genetic Correlations That Explain Much Of The Average Iq Variation Between Population Groups And Between Individuals?

    THE STATE OF THE SCIENCE

    The evidence exists, however, the causes are more obvious: 1) the size of the underclasses. and 2) neotonic(pedomorphic) evolution – meaning the retention of childhood features, and 3) transfer of female verbal acuity to males because of pedomorphic evolution.

    Cold Climates, Agrarianism, Manorialism, and the raw Capital Costs of Tools (metals) needed to survive in those conditions, in addition to the aggressive hanging of the underclasses for more than a thousand years, allowed both upward redistribution of calories and reproduction, and the downward population of labor by the middle genetic classes.

    So by the time of the industrial revolution (if not the literacy revolution) europe (and west asia) had vast stores of underutilized human capital. However, both had to break free of the church and the bureaucracy which had made the vast majority of capital “dead” (static) and in support of rent seeking (church bureaucracy and chinese imperial bureaucracy).

    For the rest of the world, they have been unsuccessful at one or both of two factors: either (a) decimating the underclasses, and (b) developing deflationary grammars (methods) in the sequence math, logics, reason, empirical law (tort), and science.

    West europeans and east asians and ashkenazi were able to limit the size of their underclasses and to force upward redistribution of reproduction. East asians have the highest Neoteny, West Europeans, and then Ashkenazi. And less visible testosterone levels to equal more visible morphology(features).

    This is the primary difference between the races and subraces: Degree of neoteny, and distribution of male and female traits (brain structures) between the genders. Strangely enough, in the Ashkenazi they have nearly reversed it. Which is why they have such exceptional verbal (if not spatial) skills.

    So that’s the state of the science as I understand it.

    in other words, the greatest material differences are driven by the size of the underclasses, and therefore the median distribution in the gene pool, and therefore the language, norms, traditions, and institutions necessary or the persistence of such a gene pool with such a distribution.

    All of this is very simple. The marxist-postmodernist-feminist attempt at the second dark age – this time of pseudoscience – just made us lose a century and a half to their deceptions.

    https://www.quora.com/How-will-IQ-skeptics-and-social-justice-advocates-react-if-genome-wide-association-studies-find-strong-genetic-correlations-that-explain-much-of-the-average-IQ-variation-between-population-groups-and-between