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. Apr 19, 2018 5:21am
Form: Short Note
-
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. Apr 19, 2018 5:21am
-
SMV
The endless supply of 17-23 year old girls that send photos to web sites to test (raise) their market value (SMV), and the endless supply of men’s attention that will never tire of ‘window shopping’ same sites (pages, streams, forums). The age of 23 is peak female SMV (market value), because it is peak fertility. However, long term SMV, differs greatly. In other words, it’s pretty hard to be 23 and not attractive. It’s pretty hard to be over 35 and be attractive. And only the best genes last beyond 45. Now men, we don’t peak until 34 or so, and our SMV only increases if we remain fit, sociable, and have assets. The difference between the genders is that we can choose to have high SMV – OR CHOOSE NOT TO.
-
SMV
The endless supply of 17-23 year old girls that send photos to web sites to test (raise) their market value (SMV), and the endless supply of men’s attention that will never tire of ‘window shopping’ same sites (pages, streams, forums). The age of 23 is peak female SMV (market value), because it is peak fertility. However, long term SMV, differs greatly. In other words, it’s pretty hard to be 23 and not attractive. It’s pretty hard to be over 35 and be attractive. And only the best genes last beyond 45. Now men, we don’t peak until 34 or so, and our SMV only increases if we remain fit, sociable, and have assets. The difference between the genders is that we can choose to have high SMV – OR CHOOSE NOT TO.
-
Regarding “Propertarianism for Dummies”
FYI: It’s a joke. There is no possible way to make: Acquisitionism -> Testimonialism -> Propertarianism -> Natural Law, for ‘dummies’, any more than there is formal logic, systems programming, or the calculus.
-
Regarding “Propertarianism for Dummies”
FYI: It’s a joke. There is no possible way to make: Acquisitionism -> Testimonialism -> Propertarianism -> Natural Law, for ‘dummies’, any more than there is formal logic, systems programming, or the calculus.
-
REGARDING “PROPERTARIANISM FOR DUMMIES” FYI: It’s a joke. There is no possible w
REGARDING “PROPERTARIANISM FOR DUMMIES”
FYI: It’s a joke. There is no possible way to make: Acquisitionism -> Testimonialism -> Propertarianism -> Natural Law, for ‘dummies’, any more than there is formal logic, systems programming, or the calculus.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-19 11:40:00 UTC
-
ELECTRICITY AND THE VULNERABILITY OF GRIDS Power is power is power. When they ch
ELECTRICITY AND THE VULNERABILITY OF GRIDS
Power is power is power. When they chose Edison and central power (dc), over Tesla and distributed power (ac), they created the vulnerability of all central production: the ability to use a concentration of forces to take control (or destroy).
He who can destroy a thing, defacto owns a thing.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-19 10:43:00 UTC
-
The endless supply of 17-23 year old girls that send photos to web sites to test
The endless supply of 17-23 year old girls that send photos to web sites to test (raise) their market value (SMV), and the endless supply of men’s attention that will never tire of ‘window shopping’ same sites (pages, streams, forums). The age of 23 is peak female SMV (market value), because it is peak fertility. However, long term SMV, differs greatly. In other words, it’s pretty hard to be 23 and not attractive. It’s pretty hard to be over 35 and be attractive. And only the best genes last beyond 45. Now men, we don’t peak until 34 or so, and our SMV only increases if we remain fit, sociable, and have assets. The difference between the genders is that we can choose to have high SMV – OR CHOOSE NOT TO.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-19 10:01:00 UTC
-
International trade is almost entirely capitalist, and reciprocal – they have no
International trade is almost entirely capitalist, and reciprocal – they have no choice.
Contrary to propaganda, all states are largely social democratic – they have no choice.
Contrary to image, businesses are largely socialist internally – they have no choice.
As expected, all families are communist – they have no choice.
Because each demands what is necessary to maintain the balance between available information, possible incentives, probable means and desired ends.
However when we try to misapply decidability from one condition to the other, we do so in opposition to the available information, available incentives, possible means, and desired ends.
This is not alterable.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-19 09:29:00 UTC