Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • IS A MISNOMER The term anti-depressant is a mis-categorization of an SSRI. So to

    http://www.philly.com/philly/health/topics/HealthDay711263_20160524_Antidepressants_Not_Just_for_Depression_Any_More.htmlANTI-DEPRESSANT IS A MISNOMER

    The term anti-depressant is a mis-categorization of an SSRI. So to call a drug an anti-depressant rather than an SSRI is a falsehood.

    We do not in fact KNOW why SSRI’s work since the serotonin deficiency theory doesn’t appear to be withstanding empirical scrutiny. It could be because of increasing blood and oxygen flow to midbrain regions, or it could be because of neurogenesis in underdeveloped regions. Or it could be because underdeveloped regions or under-pruned regions, are excessively subject to stresses (cortisol) so that those regions lack adequate neurological transmission for handling stress. It could be that fringe theories that gut bacteria losses have broken the sympathetic relationship between dopaminergenic and serotonin distribution processes. It could be all of the above.

    What it appears is that SSRI’s in general, alleviate STRESSES on the brain caused by many, many issues.

    Depression is a form of exhaustion. Autism spectrum disorders, Social Anxiety, Post traumatic stress disorders, Panic disorders, and Migraines are all symptoms of stress, exhaustion from stress, and damage from stress.

    The working theory is that SSRIs are to stress effects, what antibiotics are to the immune system: they provide a relief from the cause whereby the body can work at repairing itself. Although just like any other form of cellular damage, cellular under-development, or cellular system depletion, once significant damage has been incurred, some of it is not fully repairable – and the mind is a very sensitive thing if for no other reason that we remember the difference between prior and current conditions.

    We evolved to work in tribes of hunter gatherers. We did not evolve to work in modernity deprived of family and tribal security, saturated with information creating self doubt, and eating sugars and preservatives as compensation for lack of the mood-raising of oxygenation obtained through physical exertion. Modernity limits the accumulation of damage to our cells, but it increases intellectual and emotional stresses dramatically. Neurons have taken the damage in the information era, that physical stresses have in prior eras.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-25 03:47:00 UTC

  • What did feminists expect? That if they imposed their will, we would not respond

    What did feminists expect? That if they imposed their will, we would not respond by imposing ours?

    You want progressivism? Great. We want fascism. And we fight, while you talk. So who is stronger?

    So can now we go back to natural law, rule of law, the family, and houses where we trade in the production of commons?

    Marriage was a mutual compromise, and gender differences in interest resolved in the family, while economic differences between families resolved by the creating of commons in the parliament.

    Feminism seeks to end the compromise, so why would men not abandon their contribution to the compromise as well?

    Lets just get back to trade and compromise. OK?

    Otherwise we just let the Islamists have at you, or return to aggressive paternalism. It’s not like you could stop it.

    Thanks.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-24 07:23:00 UTC

  • EVOLVING PAST ASPIE I have many aspie traits. But I have evolved around those th

    EVOLVING PAST ASPIE

    I have many aspie traits. But I have evolved around those that determine preferences. I simply cannot evolve beyond those of perception – I cannot choose to be more empathic any more than another can choose not to be color blind.

    In person I come across as socially competent. But it was hard won. Mostly by listening and trying to understand.

    We all desire the world to speak to us in our terms. But this is just exporting the cost of understanding into others – theft.

    Seek to understand, not to agree, and not to be understood.

    I suppose that my advice to aspie friends is to take advantage of your gift which insulates you from the pressure of empathy and norms, by pursuing truth.

    It is logical that we sound self centered to others because we have no empathic method of comparison and judgement. Only appeal to our own methods of comparison and judgement. So we say “I would” or “I do” too often for normals.

    But despite our lack of empathy, we display the same desire for human contact and interaction as do normals.

    But the way to obtain that human interaction is to work hard to understand others. And mention the self only in our internal voice.

    You see. Autism eliminates the sense of self. We struggle to know ourselves as hard as we struggle to know others.

    But in practice we can only come to understand ourselves by understanding others. Otherwise we are attempting to draw water from a dry well.

    Our function in the division of perception and cognition is to detect error, and when possible provide correction.

    But our gift comes at the expense of emotional maturity.

    So it is best to think of our objectives in life as the struggle to understand and communicate with the same level of effort that normals use in their struggle to insulate their thoughts from normative, emotional and cognitive biases.

    When we meet in the middle and exchange information, together we have greater understanding than either of us can have in our own.

    Revel in your gift. But recognize that as a minority norms and education are constructed for normals. And so we must find a way of educating ourselves without the vast institutional structures that normals have to assist them.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-23 22:22:00 UTC

  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCES Humans regulate each other by the behavior we call ‘pro

    ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCES

    Humans regulate each other by the behavior we call ‘property’. AI’s that do also will readily simulate human behavior.

    Choices require a means of decidability. Property is the only decidable value that is calculable(rational)+cooperative.

    All human moral intuitions are reducible to prohibitions on imposition against various inventories (property).

    Ergo, any AI algorithm requires decidability, and one that may not violate such impositions will produce moral actions.

    Humans suffer from pre-cooperative impulses for survival that are non rational for an AI to develop unless by design.

    Ledgers (~blockchains) are necessary for AI’s to gain access to external actions, access regulated by non AI algorithms.

    But that said, I have seen nothing that even vaguely approaches AI. Only systems that process discreet data faster that can – and give us the illusion of intelligence by doing so.

    Ai’s, like mathematical axioms, produce deterministic consequences that appear ‘magical’ to us. But AI exists in fact rather than illusion, if and only if the algorithms are capable of free-association followed by Introspective regression-testing for falsehood (survival of possibility).

    Consciousness is produced by the (brief) memory of continuous comparison of changes in state, perceived by continuous searching of memories. The thing we call ‘mind’ is just a bag of emotions that react to changes in state of property-in-toto, and use (very) short term memory to accumulate emotions and associate them with those memories.

    I’ve been working on this problem since the early 80’s and our lack of progress is still a problem of hardware.

    That said, an intelligence will always merely fool us.

    Anything intelligent in the sense we mean it, will compete with us the way other creatures compete with us.

    And that is the last thing we want to bring into this world.

    Ergo, an assertion that the first law of decidability is that property-in-toto may not be violated – no involuntary cost may be imposed by action or inaction against property in toto.

    Ergo, an assertion that the second law of decidability is that any agent capable of choice or action, must be monitored by a non-sentient moral agent that prohibits the cognizance of, or action upon, any cost that wold be imposed involuntarily against property in toto.

    This agent can cause analogy to pain (cost) upon any concept or action that would prohibit the calculation (use of) that memory or concept that imposes cost, and prohibit entirely action that would impose an involuntary cost.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-23 12:00:00 UTC

  • WE DON”T TRUST CANADA AND AUSTRALIA. THEY BEHAVE LIKE TRUST FUND BABIES. WHY SHO

    https://www.quora.com/Does-the-United-States-trust-Australia/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=57d64a4eNO, WE DON”T TRUST CANADA AND AUSTRALIA. THEY BEHAVE LIKE TRUST FUND BABIES. WHY SHOULD WE?

    Australia and Canada both suffer from extraordinary privileges that they attribute to their own actions or own beliefs rather than the windfall produced by their ancestor’s conquest of primitive lands, using science, guns, germs, steel, accounting, and rule of law.

    None of us take Australia or Canada any more seriously than we take the girl whose father pays for everything seriously. It’s nice that she gets to live that way but it has nothing to do with her or her judgements and everything to do with the aggressive use of dominance in business, industry, war and politics by her father and his father, and his before him.

    It’s actually painful to listen to Australians, Canadians, and american Urbanites, (As well as many urban brits). All trust fund babies trying to signal their high mindedness because they have no achievements to point to of their own.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-22 07:43:00 UTC

  • ONLY CAN WE HAVE A PERFECT GOVERNMENT – WE HAD IT. We had the perfect government

    https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-have-a-perfect-government-and-make-everyone-happy/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=75598c1cNOT ONLY CAN WE HAVE A PERFECT GOVERNMENT – WE HAD IT.

    We had the perfect government: Monarchy, Multi-House Parliaments with one house per class, and the Common Law under Rule of law, under Nationalism (tribalism).

    The Monarch had only power of veto. The houses functioned as a market for trading commons between the different socio-economic classes. And an homogenous polity can act redistributively because everyone is a near relation (kin) and not a competitor.

    This is why the Nordic countries are as they are: small homogenous protestant nations that have practiced eugenic reproduction for more than a thousand years, and perhaps as long as 3500 years. They bypassed the empire phase during colonialism and so they did not develop state corporatism, and therefore the ability to commercially and militarily profit from heterogeneous polities.

    Nordic countries then produce the ideal because they are small homogenous eugenic nation states with common interests, little diversity, and lack the population, territorial, economic, and military scale needed to engage in conquest by immigration, territorial expansion, economic conquest, or military conquest.

    The dirty secret of the Human Genome project is that our tribes and races are vastly unequal, largely because some of our tribes and races have been better at suppressing the rates of reproduction of the lower classes (eugenics). And the reason is that the northern climates do not allow marginal individuals to survive under agrarianism. And that most northern peoples aggressively used hanging, delayed marriage and childbirth, regulated access to farmland to people of good character, and effectively engaged in active upward redistribution of reproduction.

    If you want a Denmark you need to fill it with Danes. The northeast of Europe developed “Bipartite Manorialism” earliest, and the church’s ban on cousin marriage the earliest, and that is one of the significant reasons for northern europe’s advantage.

    Why? Because while you need to reach the Pareto optimum of both 80% of resources in the control of your top 20%, AND your top 20% must have IQ’s above 106, this cannot be done by improving the intelligence of your best, but by by reducing the numbers of your worst, until your best are the top 20% of your population.

    This is counter-intuitive. But the point being that your lower classes are a tragic burden on your people.

    This is the dirty secret of the west’s success: we hung 1% of the population every year. Over twenty years, this has a profound effect. Over five hundred years it will raise a people out of ignorance and poverty.

    How can we do the same without hanging our troublemakers? We can do it by preventing their births.

    Otherwise there is no way to get to Denmark. And instead, under normative dysgenia we will decline just as the entire Arab world has declined under islam: through dysgenic reproduction, that depresses the reproduction of our best, and increases the reproduction of our worst.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Science and Uncomfortable Truth

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-22 07:32:00 UTC

  • PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS Sinic (Eastern) : Basis of Sinic philosophy is Sun Tzu: Dece

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-key-differences-in-business-culture-between-Western-and-Eastern/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=fa2e63d0EASTERN PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS

    Sinic (Eastern) :

    Basis of Sinic philosophy is Sun Tzu: Deception and delay until opportunity to defeat. We are strongest when we have total control, and cannot be victimized by the other, and no longer need to compromise.

    Falsehood is expected.

    Preserve Face, avoiding offense.

    Information Hiding, is expected.

    Self benefit rather than symmetric benefit is not only expected but desirable.

    Decisions are made outside the room by those in authority.

    Agreements are temporarily useful for the moment, but open to revision and circumstance at all times.

    Differences are to be hidden until they can be used to produce asymmetric benefits.

    Disagreements are to be used as opportunities for asymmetric benefits.

    Corruption is expected and even ‘understood’.

    Asymmetric benefit is expected and ‘understood’

    Non Performance is expected, and ‘understood’.

    Changing the terms of the agreement is expected and ‘understood’.

    WESTERN PHILOSOPHICAL BASIS

    Germanic (Western):

    Basis of western philosophy is Aristotle: Truth, transparency, and cooperation leading to mutual benefit – we are strongest when we cooperate together, and we preserve our cooperation through constant compromise.

    Truth, even if unpleasant.

    Directness, even if offensive.

    Information transparency, even if disadvantageous.

    Objective is mutual benefit – and non parasitism, developing long term trust.

    Decisions are made in the room between the negotiators.

    Agreements are binding contracts not subject to revision or circumstance, even if risky.

    Resolve differences quickly, and move on.

    Disagreements must result in mutually beneficial compromise.

    Corruption is inexcusable.

    Asymmetric benefit is inexcusable.

    Non performance is inexcusable.

    Changing the terms of the agreement is inexcusable.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-22 07:12:00 UTC

  • A YEAR OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY (further rumination on populism) Well, over the pas

    A YEAR OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY

    (further rumination on populism)

    Well, over the past 12-14 months I have danced with populism a bit. And I understand the game of feeding the fires of fashionable passions. I have met a lot of people. I have met people who are more likely to carry out a revolution. And during this time we have seen the rise of the trump/sanders movement. And that movement has changed our political discourse as much or more so than any intellectual movement can.

    Now, I don’t believe the presidential elections will change much – other than to establish a discourse. But the hope that dramatic change will come about is enough to transfer the interest of all activists from permanent change by revolution to temporary improvement by democratic action – at least for a time.

    That’s a way of saying that I need to keep at my work because populism has returned to strategy under democracy rather than strategy toward a revolution – and its a revolution we will require to change the state of affairs.

    My experiment with populism was fun, and socially rewarding, but ultimately a failed experiment. Why? for no other reason than it decreased the time I spent on serious work, distracted me from thinking about the more serious issues. It associated my work at least a small part with negativity. And it has caused me personal frustration.

    That is because my solution to the problem of social order is a nationalist one, and a universal one. Because it is not a criticism of race, but a criticism of corporatism. Not a criticism of race but a criticism of class. Not a criticism of race but a criticism of multiculturalism. Not a criticism of race, but a criticism of genetic devolution. Not a criticism of race, but an advocacy of preserving the people who, for apparently genetic reasons, are the most creative and innovative people.

    I start with the proposition that innovation and creativity and competition and lack of underclass burden, generate ‘goods’ which assist mankind in transcendence of the animal. And that western science, economics, politics, art, and thought is the byproduct of martial epistemology, among minority voluntary warriors (and not majority mandatory soldiers.)

    And that all peoples can transcend if they adopt the institutions of ‘truth’, while all the time suppressing the reproduction of the lower classes.

    In other words, while I am sure that my own people will succeed by returning to their model. I am also sure that other peoples will succeed by adopting our model. And if they do not adopt our model, then they are adopting ignorance, parasitism, and dysgenia. And as such are our enemies. If a people must persist that is different from whether a people must expand. I advocate persistence of all, but that expansion of people rather than our model, violates our model.

    In this way you may call me a familialist, a tribalist, a nationalist, and a racist in the sense that I advocate for transcendence.

    But I am not interested in mere complaints about others who are at present unable to adopt the technologies of transcendence that we have invented. They do what they are able. We can make them able to do otherwise, and transcend.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-22 04:19:00 UTC

  • What Are The Key Differences In Business Culture Between Western And Eastern?

    Sinic (Eastern) :

    Basis of Sinic philosophy is Sun Tzu: Deception and delay until opportunity to defeat. We are strongest when we have total control, and cannot be victimized by the other, and no longer need to compromise.

    Falsehood is expected.
    Preserve Face, avoiding offense.
    Information Hiding, is expected.
    Self benefit rather than symmetric benefit is not only expected but desirable.
    Decisions are made outside the room by those in authority.
    Agreements are temporarily useful for the moment, but open to revision and circumstance at all times.
    Differences are to be hidden until they can be used to produce asymmetric benefits.
    Disagreements are to be used as opportunities for asymmetric benefits.

    Corruption is expected and even ‘understood’.
    Asymmetric benefit is expected and ‘understood’
    Non Performance is expected, and ‘understood’.
    Changing the terms of the agreement is expected and ‘understood’.

    Germanic (Western):
    Basis of western philosophy is Aristotle: Truth, transparency, and cooperation leading to mutual benefit – we are strongest when we cooperate together, and we preserve our cooperation through constant compromise.

    Truth, even if unpleasant.
    Directness, even if offensive.
    Information transparency, even if disadvantageous.
    Objective is mutual benefit – and non parasitism, developing long term trust.
    Decisions are made in the room between the negotiators.
    Agreements are binding contracts not subject to revision or circumstance, even if risky.
    Resolve differences quickly, and move on.
    Disagreements must result in mutually beneficial compromise.

    Corruption is inexcusable.
    Asymmetric benefit is inexcusable.
    Non performance is inexcusable.
    Changing the terms of the agreement is inexcusable.

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-key-differences-in-business-culture-between-Western-and-Eastern

  • Had Bin Laden Been Hiding In Australia, Would The United States Have Trust Australia More Than Pakistan?

    Australia and Canada both suffer from extraordinary privileges that they attribute to their own actions or own beliefs rather than the windfall produced by their ancestor’s conquest of primitive lands, using science, guns, germs, steel, accounting, and rule of law.

    None of us take Australia or Canada any more seriously than we take the girl whose father pays for everything seriously. It’s nice that she gets to live that way but it has nothing to do with her or her judgements and everything to do with the aggressive use of dominance in business, industry, war and politics by her father and his father, and his before him.

    It’s actually painful to listen to Australians, Canadians, and american Urbanites, (As well as many urban brits). All trust fund babies trying to signal their high mindedness because they have no achievements to point to of their own.

    https://www.quora.com/Had-Bin-Laden-been-hiding-in-Australia-would-the-United-States-have-trust-Australia-more-than-Pakistan