Curt Doolittle

Form: Quote Commentary

  • “Cinema can still explain the whole world. Mathematicians think it’s math. I bel

    “Cinema can still explain the whole world. Mathematicians think it’s math. I believe it’s cinema.” – Jean-Luc Godard

    Mathematics can explain only what we cannot sense. That is why we have mathematics: to compensate for our limited ability to perceive the universe.

    However, human concepts must at some point be reduced to those stimuli which we can experience. All language is reducible to an analogy to experience. All imagery is by definition experience. Mathematics is, at some degree of abstraction, simply a vehicle for compensating for our terribly weak short term memories by creating categories, applying quantities, and rearranging symbols while preserving ratios. The mind could do this without mathematics if we had the short term memory to do it with.

    Film is, today, the most informationally rich means by which, that which we *cannot* perceive directly, can be reduced by analogy and narrative, to that which we *can* perceive directly.

    At first glance, these statements are not terribly romantic.

    But after we consider that human beings have invented mathematics, the narrative, and visual media so that we can rapidly sense what we could not sense directly, we can certainly wonder at the marvel of what man can accomplish in the service of his mind and his experience. And in that understanding we can appreciate that there is no material difference between mathematics and cinema. They are simply extensions of us.

    And that is as romantic an experience as any.

    – Curt Doolittle 😉

    (Originally posted under FilmmakerIQ)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-15 04:41:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9LWioXYaic

    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-02 18:47:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.alternativeright.com/main/the-magazine/gun-control-as-castration/

    Source date (UTC): 2013-01-02 05:16:00 UTC

  • IS EVENLY DISTRIBUTED BY POLITICAL PARTY (Why? Its not complicated. )

    http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2012/08/racism-by-political-party.htmlRACISM IS EVENLY DISTRIBUTED BY POLITICAL PARTY

    (Why? Its not complicated. )

    Source date (UTC): 2012-12-29 08:55:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.aeonmagazine.com/world-views/roger-scruton-fake-culture/

    Source date (UTC): 2012-12-29 07:03:00 UTC

  • THOUGHT THIS WAS A JOKE: IT’S NOT. HE ACTUALLY SAID IT. There is a sort of chain

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/43670783I THOUGHT THIS WAS A JOKE: IT’S NOT. HE ACTUALLY SAID IT.

    There is a sort of chain letter floating around about the Buffett plan. I thought it was a joke. But it turns out it’s only partly humor.

    The institutional solutions I suggest we put into place are probably more effective than Buffett’s. But the sentiment’s the same.

    So I’ll share it on sentiment rather than on reason.

    ‘if the deficit is greater than 3% all members of congress become ineligible for office.”

    Simple plan. 🙂

    Source date (UTC): 2012-12-26 06:08:00 UTC

  • IS DEPENDENT UPON RACE MIXTURE. “It turns out that after adjusting for the major

    http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2011/03/who-kills-who.htmlVIOLENCE IS DEPENDENT UPON RACE MIXTURE.

    “It turns out that after adjusting for the major demographic differences between the two nations, Canada is a much more violent place than is the U.S. (Ed. At least Canadians are polite, eh? Just don’t cross them….)”

    http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2011/03/who-kills-who.html?m=1

    http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2011/03/us-vs-canada-comparing-oranges-and.html?m=1

    http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2011/03/us-vs-canada-comparing-apples-to-apples.html?m=1

    Source date (UTC): 2012-12-20 08:26:00 UTC

  • ON INEQUALITY 🙂

    http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/politicalcalculations/2012/12/08/sir_issac_newton_explains_income_inequalityANTIQUITY ON INEQUALITY 🙂

    Source date (UTC): 2012-12-12 10:57:00 UTC

  • Single Women Now Rule America

    [S]INGLE WOMEN RULE AMERICA “President Obama won women by a 55 to 44 percent margin and lost men by a 45 to 52 percent margin, leaving an 18-point gender gap, up from 12 points in 2008. But this difference is dwarfed by the marriage gap—the margin between married and unmarried women. Married women supported the Republican candidate in 2012 by a comfortable six-point margin. It is Obama’s huge victory among unmarried women that delivered the women’s vote and with it, the White House. There is a 43-point difference in the margin between married women and unmarried women, a number which exceeds the gender gap by a factor of two. ” — Greenberg Quinlan Rosner (firm) Women are marrying the state, and returning to their natural preference: to bear children at will and place the responsibility for raising them on the tribe. (Now, as much as I argue that this will undermine the truce in reproductive strategies that we call monogamy, and by consequence I believe it will undermine the high trust society, I am also cognizant of the fact that we never had the technology before to make it possible to have BOTH a division of labor AND unregulated childbirth. The problem is that I just don’t know. I can’t see how it’s possible. But then, i’m not omniscient either.)

  • ENGLISH SUPERIORITY “Relative to other groups from Britain, Puritans were not ou

    ENGLISH SUPERIORITY

    “Relative to other groups from Britain, Puritans were not outbred. Yet they are more idealistic and altruistic. That may have something to do with them being from the most Danish part of Britain. It certainly is to do with them being economically advanced. A market economy only works where there can be basic trust between unrelated people. And the British are the descendants of the economically successful. -(Clark)”

    Source date (UTC): 2012-12-08 06:59:00 UTC