Curt Doolittle

Form: Thread

  • (New Followers) WHY IS WHAT YOU AND THE OTHERS WRITE COMPLICATED? The short answ

    (New Followers)
    WHY IS WHAT YOU AND THE OTHERS WRITE COMPLICATED?
    The short answer is that it looks like language but it’s much closer to math.

    Please notice how I use:
    … a) ‘lists’ (serializations) and
    … b) ‘balances between male and female’ (equilibrations)
    … c) ‘operational language’ (actions)
    … d) And weaving together lists and balances to illustrate the consistency of the properties of the universe, including humans, over time.

    This structure is the equivlant of writing object-oriented program code. Where the purpose of object-oriented programming is to produce Simulations that survive adversarial competition (life and evolution).

    For example:
    … a) Serialized lists = Types
    … b) Equilibrations = Functions
    … c) Operational language = Syntax
    … d) Together = Classes

    WHY?
    Because if you write in this way, in complete sentences in operational language, using definitions by types, and equilibrations by functions together in classes, it is very difficult to error, bias, or deceive (yourself or others) without the grammar and syntax exposing that fact.

    This doesn’t mean we write everything algorithmically. It means that we can expand anything we write into algorithms, classes, types, and functions and test what we hear or what we have said.

    As in most programming languages, there are a limited number of rules. Likewise in human experience, there are a limited number of rules. And there aren’t very many. There is a very simple ternary logic to these rules. The ‘work’ in learning this method of testing the truth of any statement is largely in memorizing how to use these techniques on the one hand and overcoming your intuitions that you assume are products of reason so that you are in fact relying on reason and ‘computation’.

    I hope this helps.
    Cheers
    -Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-08 23:53:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633616867213430785

  • (New Followers) WHY IS WHAT YOU AND THE OTHERS WRITE COMPLICATED? The short answ

    (New Followers)
    WHY IS WHAT YOU AND THE OTHERS WRITE COMPLICATED?
    The short answer is that it looks like language but it’s much closer to math.

    Please notice how I use:
    … a) ‘lists’ (serializations) and
    … b) ‘balances between male and female’ (equilibrations)
    … c) ‘operational language’ (actions)
    … d) And weaving together lists and balances to illustrate the consistency of the properties of the universe, including humans, over time.

    This structure is the equivlant of writing object-oriented program code. Where the purpose of object-oriented programming is to produce Simulations that survive adversarial competition (life and evolution).

    For example:
    … a) Serialized lists = Types
    … b) Equilibrations = Functions
    … c) Operational language = Syntax
    … d) Together = Classes

    WHY?
    Because if you write in this way, in complete sentences in operational language, using definitions by types, and equilibrations by functions together in classes, it is very difficult to error, bias, or deceive (yourself or others) without the grammar and syntax exposing that fact.

    This doesn’t mean we write everything algorithmically. It means that we can expand anything we write into algorithms, classes, types, and functions and test what we hear of what we have said.

    As in most programming languages, there are a limited number of rules. Likewise in human experience, there are a limited number of rules. And there aren’t very many. There is a very simple ternary logic to these rules. The ‘work’ in learning this method of testing the truth of any statement is largely in memorizing how to use these techniques on the one hand and overcoming your intuitions that you assume are products of reason so that you are in fact relying on reason and ‘computation’.

    I hope this helps.
    Cheers
    -Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-08 23:53:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633616576174858240

  • (New Followers) WHY IS WHAT YOU AND THE OTHERS WRITE COMPLICATED? The short answ

    (New Followers)
    WHY IS WHAT YOU AND THE OTHERS WRITE COMPLICATED?
    The short answer is that it looks like language but it’s much closer to math.

    Please notice how I use:
    … a) ‘lists’ (serializations) and
    … b) ‘balances between male and female’ (equilibrations)
    … c) ‘operational language’ (actions)
    … d) And weaving together lists and balances to illustrate the consistency of the properties of the universe, including humans, over time.

    This structure is the equivlant of writing object-oriented program code. Where the purpose of object-oriented programming is to produce Simulations that survive adversarial competition (life and evolution).

    For example:
    … a) Serialized lists = Types
    … b) Equilibrations = Functions
    … c) Operational language = Syntax
    … d) Together = Classes

    WHY?
    Because if you write in this way, in complete sentences in operational language, using definitions by types, and equilibrations by functions together in classes, it is very difficult to error, bias, or deceive (yourself or others) without the grammar and syntax exposing that fact.

    This doesn’t mean we write everything
    algorithmically. It means that we can expand anything we write into algorithms, classes, types, and functions and test what we hear of what we have said.

    As in most programming languages there are a limited number of rules. Likewise in human experience, there are a limited number of rules. And there aren’t very many. There is a very simple ternary logic to these rules. The ‘work’ in learning this method of testing the truth of any statement is largely in memorizing how to use these techniques on the one hand and overcoming your intuitions that you assume are products of reason so that you are in fact relying on reason and ‘computation’.

    I hope this helps.
    Cheers
    -Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-08 23:53:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633616006487633920

  • TEACHING ADVANCED CONCEPTS ON SOCIAL MEDIA? You *CAN* teach on social media. – I

    TEACHING ADVANCED CONCEPTS ON SOCIAL MEDIA?

    You *CAN* teach on social media.
    – It’s much harder on twitter than facebook. And that’s for one simple reason – the number of people on facebook vs twitter. My hope is that over the next two years as Twitter rebuilds it’s stack, and expands with new features, the combination of the cesspool that is FB’s management and personnel, vs the rise in twitter features, will cause more and more people to slowly migrate to the ‘everything app’ that musk envisions.

    Teaching on Social Media:
    1) Your audience will have different levels of understanding.
    2) Your audience will enter at different times, and progress at different rates.
    3) So you can’t control the learning process like a classroom. Instead you run it like a one-room schoolhouse with different students rotating in and out over time.
    4) So you develop a set of principles (themes) that you need to convey.
    … a) And then repeat core concepts regularly.
    … b) And use your concepts to explain current events constantly.
    … c) Then produce deep content tying everything to gether for the more developed audience.
    … d) And incrementally refine your presentation of the ideas as you go along.
    … e) And repeat a,b,c,d constantly and vary the depth based on the audience. For example, if you add a thousand new followers, then emphasize a,b, and if you’re noticing good comments and feedback, emphasize c,d.
    … f) Provide positive feedback for any progress, not just ‘getting it right or perfect’. And share the work of those who get it right or perfect.
    5) This ensures that people of different abilities who are interested enough to follow you, progress at their own rates.

    I teach content that’s really complicated: cross disciplinary in logic, language, cognitive science, behavioral economics, political economics, group evolutionary strategy, and the formal construction of algorithmic law from the first principles, and first principles of the natural law of cooperation.

    It’s about as hard to master as a STEM degree. It provides universal explanatory power for everything in the human experience. And for all intents and purposes, it’s free.

    You can do it on social media.
    But you can’t do it as we do in school and university.
    It’s more like a one room school house conducted as discourse and case studies in grad school.

    Cheers
    -Curt Doolittle.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-08 20:41:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633568594280710145

  • TEACHING ADVANCED CONCEPTS ON SOCIAL MEDIA? You *CAN* teach on social media. – I

    TEACHING ADVANCED CONCEPTS ON SOCIAL MEDIA?

    You *CAN* teach on social media.
    – It’s much harder on twitter than facebook. And that’s for one simple reason – the number of people on facebook vs twitter. My hope is that over the next two years as Twitter rebuilds it’s stack, and expands with new features, the combination of the cesspool that is FB’s management and personnel, vs the rise in twitter features, will cause more and more people to slowly migrate to the ‘everything app’ that musk envisions.

    Teaching on Social Media:
    1) Your audience will have different levels of understanding.
    2) Your audience will enter at different times, and progress at different rates.
    3) So you can’t control the learning process like a classroom. Instead you run it like a one-room schoolhouse with different students rotating in and out over time.
    4) So you develop a set of principles (themes) that you need to convey.
    … a) And then repeat core concepts regularly.
    … b) And use your concepts to explain current events constantly.
    … c) Then produce deep content tying everything to gether for the more developed audience.
    … d) And incrementally refine your presentation of the ideas as you go along.
    … e) And repeat a,b,c,d constantly and vary the depth based on the audience. For example, if you add a thousand new followers, then emphasize a,b, and if you’re noticing good comments and feedback, emphasize c,d.
    … f) Provide positive feedback for any progress, not just ‘getting it right or perfect’. And share the work of those who get it right or perfect.
    5) This ensures that people of different abilities who are interested enough to follow you, progress at their own rates.

    I teach content that’s really complicated: cross disciplinary in logic, language, cognitive science, behavioral economics, political economics, group evolutionary strategy, and the formal construction of algorithmic law from the first principles, and first principles of the natural law of cooperation.

    It’s about as hard to master as a STEM degree. It provides universal explanatory power for everything in the human experience. And for all intents and purposes, it’s free.

    You can do it on social media.
    But you can’t do it as we do in school and university.
    It’s more like a one room school house conducted as discourse and case studies in grad school.

    Cheers
    -Curt Doolittle.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-08 20:41:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633568593987219457

  • THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF THE STATE OF WORLD AFFAIRS AND WHAT IT ALL MEANS.

    THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF THE STATE OF WORLD AFFAIRS AND WHAT IT ALL MEANS.
    (#China #Russia #Ukraine #WorldwarIII #TheFuture)
    French Sociologist and Historian Emmanuel Todd is making the rounds, explaining that the war of Russia and China against the West with Ukraine as the short term proxy, is resulting in a war of authoritarian *industrial producers* against *neoliberal financial and legal services*. And that in a war of material production, GDP figures are deeply misleading. Either you have the capacity to produce war material, energy, and food, or you do not.

    At present the West does not – it’s exported production in favor of cheap prices for the upper half at the cost of the lower half in the near term risking their populations in the long term.

    And, which government can adapt an economy more quickly? Those with underpaid labor commanded by authority, or those with highly paid labor in markets only influenced by a government? The west is outmatched in what matters: the lower half’s ability to produce weapons, energy, and food. (China’s vulnerability not withstanding, when neutralized by Russia’s invulnerability.)

    The USA can fight a two-front war as long as one is land (Russia) and one is naval (china), but that’s about it. And I question if we have the manufacturing capacity sufficient to transform from a smaller number of highly precise weapons for ‘policing’ the international system of finance, transport, and trade, to fighting to defend the benefits of that international system of transport and trade – when most countries depend on it, but free ride on our western (US) military forces.

    Now, I see, I believe correctly, this war as a continuation of the world wars, which consist of the transformation from land-based agrarian empires, to industrial-based federations of nation-states. So obviously, there remain backward governments in Russia, China, Iran, and South Korea (and I won’t touch the border problems in the middle east or Africa).

    So the continuation of the world war transformation, the falsification of ‘globalism’ in the absence of global success at transforming from empires to federations, my understanding mirrors at least to some degree Todd’s: that this is the final stage of the world wars, and we will see the future as federations of self determinant nation states who depend on each other for trade, or a collapse back to pre-war empires and colonies who each war for resources instead of trade.

    Why does this matter? Human beings will, whenever possible seek prosperity and the autonomy (freedom) to exercise it. So the drive for nation-states, the resulting necessity of federations, is the evolutionary direction of mankind, and every other just burns down the clock on an ecology, climate, geology, sun, solar system, and universe that tries to drive us to extinction with disturbing frequency. So, what I have in mind, what I rationally fear, is that the primitive middle east destroyed the ancient and classical world causing two thousand years of stagnation before Europeans once again recovered enough to restore our earlier pace of evolution of man.

    So let’s not repeat that process. We are already halfway through a repetition of the Christian destruction of Rome and the classical world, with the reformation of Judaism in the form of Marxist class hatred -neoMarxism cultural hatred -Postmodernism truth hatred -Feminism man hatred -PC/Woke Race hatred. The religions of hate are just Luddisms that beckon another dark age.

    The logical consequence of the plagues in the ancient world, like the medieval, is to produce machinery that we already had the technology for, but human (animal) labor was still too cheap. Had it not been for the primitivism of the middle east, destroying seven great civilizations of the ancient world, just as marxism has incrementally destroyed civilizations of the modern, mankind would already be in the stars.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-07 17:32:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633158788978028544

  • THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF THE STATE OF WORLD AFFAIRS AND WHAT IT ALL MEANS.

    THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF THE STATE OF WORLD AFFAIRS AND WHAT IT ALL MEANS.
    (#China #Russia #Ukraine #WorldwarIII #TheFuture)
    French Sociologist and Historian Emmanuel Todd is making the rounds, explaining that the war of Russia and China against the West with Ukraine as the short term proxy, is resulting in a war of authoritarian *industrial producers* against *neoliberal financial and legal services*. And that in a war of material production, GDP figures are deeply misleading. Either you have the capacity to produce war material, energy, and food, or you do not.

    At present the West does not – it’s exported production in favor of cheap prices for the upper half at the cost of the lower half in the near term risking their populations in the long term.

    And, which government can adapt an economy more quickly? Those with underpaid labor commanded by authority, or those with highly paid labor in markets only influenced by a government? The west is outmatched in what matters: the lower half’s ability to produce weapons, energy, and food. (China’s vulnerability not withstanding, when neutralized by Russia’s invulnerability.)

    The USA can fight a two-front war as long as one is land (Russia) and one is naval (china), but that’s about it. And I question if we have the manufacturing capacity sufficient to transform from a smaller number of highly precise weapons for ‘policing’ the international system of finance, transport, and trade, to fighting to defend the benefits of that international system of transport and trade – when most countries depend on it, but free ride on our western (US) military forces.

    Now, I see, I believe correctly, this war as a continuation of the world wars, which consist of the transformation from land-based agrarian empires, to industrial-based federations of nation-states. So obviously, there remain backward governments in Russia, China, Iran, and South Korea (and I won’t touch the border problems in the middle east or Africa).

    So the continuation of the world war transformation, the falsification of ‘globalism’ in the absence of global success at transforming from empires to federations, my understanding mirrors at least to some degree Todd’s: that this is the final stage of the world wars, and we will see the future as federations of self determinant nation states who depend on each other for trade, or a collapse back to pre-war empires and colonies who each war for resources instead of trade.

    Why does this matter? Human beings will, whenever possible seek prosperity and the autonomy (freedom) to exercise it. So the drive for nation-states, the resulting necessity of federations, is the evolutionary direction of mankind, and every other just burns down the clock on an ecology, climate, geology, sun, solar system, and universe that tries to drive us to extinction with disturbing frequency. So, what I have in mind, what I rationally fear, is that the primitive middle east destroyed the ancient and classical world causing two thousand years of stagnation before Europeans once again recovered enough to restore our earlier pace of evolution of man.

    So let’s not repeat that process. We are already halfway through a repetition of the Christian destruction of Rome and the classical world, with the reformation of Judaism in the form of Marxist class hatred -neoMarxism cultural hatred -Postmodernism truth hatred -Feminism man hatred -PC/Woke Race hatred. The religions of hate are just Luddisms that beckon another dark age.

    The logical consequence of the plagues in the ancient world, like the medieval, is to produce machinery that we already had the technology for, but human (animal) labor was still too cheap. Had it not been for the primitivism of the middle east, destroying seven great civilizations of the ancient world, just as marxism has incrementally destroyed civilizations of the modern, mankind would already be in the stars.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-07 17:32:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633158788541739010

  • THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF THE STATE OF WORLD AFFAIRS AND WHAT IT ALL MEANS.

    THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION OF THE STATE OF WORLD AFFAIRS AND WHAT IT ALL MEANS.
    (#China #Russia #Ukraine #WorldwarIII #TheFuture)
    French Sociologist and Historian Emmanuel Todd is making the rounds, explaining that the war of Russia and China against the West with Ukraine as the short term proxy, is resulting in a war of authoritarian *industrial producers* against *neoliberal financial and legal services*. And that in a war of material production, GDP figures are deeply misleading. Either you have the capacity to produce war materiel, energy, and food, or you do not.

    At present the West does not – it’s exported production in favor of cheap prices for the upper half at the cost of the lower half in the near term risking the their populations in the long term.

    And, which government can adapt an economy more quickly? Those with underpaid labor commanded by authority, or those with highly paid labor in markets only influenced by a government? The west is outmached in what matters: the lower half’s ability to produce weapons, energy, and food. (China’s vulnerability not withstanding, when neutralized by Russia’s invulnerability.)

    The USA can fight a two front war as long as one is land (russia) and one is naval (china), but that’s about it. And I question if we have the manufacturing capacity sufficient to transform from a smaller number of highly precise weapons for ‘policing’ the international system of finance, transport, and trade, to fighting to defend the benefits of that international system of transport and trade – when most countries depend on it, but free ride on our western (US) military forces.

    Now, I see, I believe correctly, this war as a continuation of the world wars, which consist of the transformation from land-based agrarian empires, to industrial based federations of nation states. So obviously, there remain backward governments in Russia, China, Iran, and South Korea (and I won’t touch the border problems in the middle east or africa).

    So the continuation of the world war transformation, the falsification of ‘globalism’ in the absence of global success at transforming from empires to federations, my understanding mirrors at least to some degree Todd’s: that this is the final stage of the world wars, and we will see the future as federations of self determinant nation states who depend on eachother for trade, or a collapse back to pre-war empires and colonies who each war for resources instead of trade.

    Why does this matter? Human beings will, whenever possible seek prosperity and the autonomy (freedom) to exercise it. So the drive for nation states, the resulting necessity of federations, is the evolutionary direction of mankind, and every other just burns down the clock on an ecology, climate, geology, sun, solar systm, and universe that tries to drive us to extinction with disturbing frequency. So, what I have in mind, what I rationally fear, is that the primitive middle east destroyed the ancient and classical world causing two thousand years of stagnation before europeans once again recovered enough to restore our earlier pace of evolution of man.

    So let’s not repeat that process. We are already half way through a repetatiion of the christian desturction of rome and the classical world, with the reformation of judaism in the form of Marxist class hatred -neoMarxism cultura hatred -Postmodernism truth hatred -Feminism man hatred -PC/Woke Race hatred. The religions of hate are just luddisms that beckon another dark age.

    The logical consequence of the plagues in the ancient world, like the medieval, is to produce machinery that we had already the technology for, but human (animal) labor was still too cheap. Had it not been for the primitivism of the middle east, destroying seven great civilizations of the ancient world, just as marxism has incremetally destroyed civilizations of the modern, mankind would already be in the stars.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-07 17:32:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1633158399121584131

  • SIX QUESTIONS ILLUSTRATING LEFT VS RIGHT TRUTH? (We have our crazies on both sid

    SIX QUESTIONS ILLUSTRATING LEFT VS RIGHT TRUTH?
    (We have our crazies on both sides of the fence. So it’s a question of which side has more of what kind of crazy.)

    Let me solve this pretty easily with a few questions:

    Q: Does evolution exist?
    A: Left: Yes.
    A: Right: Yes. Or Yes but god still exists. Or Yes but it’s the work of god. Or No god just did it all.

    Q: Will you speak the truth-before-face, regardless of the impact to others’ feelings, the status or competency hierarchy, and the subseqent social cost to you?
    A: Left: No, that would be hurtful. Yes (Meaning, lying to avoid speaking truth before face)
    A: Right: Of course. That’s the moral thing to do.

    Q: Is the difference between the sexes a bias to empathizing in time, avoiding responsibility that might generate risk, hyperconsumption, and status by absence of responsibility versus systematizing over time, seeking responsibility even if it generates risk, capitalization, and status by responsibility and capitalization?
    Left: No. There are no sex differences.
    Right: Yes. Obviously.

    Q: Is diversity a good?
    A: Left: Yes!
    A: Right: Within limits. Or If of races, but not culture. Or No, not at all – people are tribal, practice kin selection, vary in aggression and regulation, always self-sort, and proximity between groups always creates friction.

    Q: Are there genetic differences between races, subraces, classes, and sexes that are immutable sources of our differences in neoteny, aggression, sociability, anti-sociability, intelligence, and that IQ and Stereotypes are the most accurate measure in psychology and sociology, and that average IQ is an accurate, and the most accurate predictor of every statistical difference between countries, from crime to GDP.
    A: Left: No. And you’re evil for thinking and saying so.
    A: Right: Obviously. How can you think otherwise?

    Q: Are there Left-Right differences in magical thinking?
    A: Left: No only the right thinks in conspiracy theories.
    A: Right: The left’s oppression narratives are their version of conspiracy theory. Oppression narratives generally blame others for oppression when they’re just observing and adapting to the laws of nature. So the left hates the right as a proxy for hating the universe. And Sure, we have people that seem to believe in conspiracy theories pretty often. Unfortunately, other than the crazy ones, a lot of them turn out to be right.

    Cheers
    -Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-03 22:41:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631786986745757697

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1631753281096781831

  • CASPIAN REPORT PUBLISHES MORE INSIGHT 😉 (I’ll frame it more so, and less kindly

    CASPIAN REPORT PUBLISHES MORE INSIGHT 😉
    https://t.co/FmaKcQRIDq
    (I’ll frame it more so, and less kindly:)
    1) Why France still acts like an empire and wants to expand that empire in Europe, by depriving Germany of its position of the core of Europe and accomplishing French long-term goals of imperially dominating Europe.
    2) Why France is insulated from disruptions of the world free trade system created by the Anglosphere: colonies and nuclear power.
    3) Why France is the model the ‘civilizations’ will return to – the pre-war model of insulation from trade competition and conflict by imperial trade alliances, and
    4) Why Russia and China are trying to imitate France – to end not only US dominance, but dependence on US presentation and policing of the world free trade system, and restore the imperial trade system. (and wars)
    5) Why France will be, is, was, and always was, the enemy of Europe just as much as Russia is the enemy of Europe. And why Germania-Intermarium must replace the france-germany influence on the continent, and leave France and her ambitions to africa.
    6) France is a north African empire.

    cc: @CaspianReport

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-01 13:44:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1630927084724912128