Curt Doolittle

Form: Thread

  • Causes and Evidence of Female “Magical Thinking” THE SCIENCE: 1) Conflating what

    Causes and Evidence of Female “Magical Thinking”

    THE SCIENCE:
    1) Conflating what they wish for with what is and what is possible.

    2) The general tendency of women to confuse what is Desirable/Undesirable with what is True/False. Or, more directly, stating their wants are truths of the world, rather than just wants of their own.

    3) The universal tendency (demonstrated in this video) of women to engage in NAXALT/AXALT: Not all X are like that, All X are like that, or more precisely, to ignore a distribution to justify an outlier, or to use an outlier in order to falsify a distribution.

    These –XALTs are both forms of denial. In other words (get ready) the woman’s cognition evolves to justify her feelings and NOT adapt to existential reality.

    Why? They are exporting satisfaction of their emotional demands onto others: MEN. (Yes really).

    This is the science, and it’s exasperating. Why? We no longer use older sisters, mothers, grandmothers, and aunts to cause women to self-regulate their magical thinking.

    And their magical thinking evolved in order to generate demand from men to satisfy them …. in exchange for affection and sex. Sorry. 🙁

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-19 21:22:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627418484740161536

  • LEARNING NATURAL LAW (P-LAW) Notes from one of our top team members: 1 – When yo

    LEARNING NATURAL LAW (P-LAW)
    Notes from one of our top team members:

    1 – When you first learn about our work, it’s incomprehensible. Like all technical disciplines, the vocabulary, logic, and concepts are alien.

    2 – Learning operational prose and e-prime provides the fist simple, yet significant insight into the depth of what we’re doing. Learning the grammars, at least vaguely understanding them, starts to provide understanding.

    3 – There is no alternative to the massive amount of reading across the disciplines that’s necessary to understand the work. We cover many disciplines. However, ANY education in economics math or physical science will help you.

    4 – The degree of advancement (innovation) in our ‘way of thinking’ is much more than people anticipate. And it’s the equivalent of a university degree worth of work.

    5 – The primary obstacle is psychological – some of us just want to know the truth(what’s testifiable) – that’s all. But some have other motives. If you want to justify a prior, or if you have a chip on your shoulder, you may or may not be able to overcome it. Now that I understand this, it’s clear why we have turned over some people who have the talent but move on – they can’t do it.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-19 20:58:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627412230294626307

  • You may be correct in that there are no good guys, but there are better and wors

    You may be correct in that there are no good guys, but there are better and worse states, and better or worst groups, and better or worse individuals within states and groups. It is very hard to argue with the ethics and morality of the anglosphere other than the slow motion of our institutions in the suppression of innovations in criminality like marxism-to-woke.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-19 17:47:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627364368479395840

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627048026161430529

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    WHICH FALLACY ARE WE ENGAGING IN?
    Economics whether neurological, behavioral, micro, political, or macro, asks us to account for the seen and unseen, which overcomes the tendency to engage in foolish judgments.

    In this case, that the costs are avoidable at all, rather than we are trying to pay the lowest costs by using time to our advantage.

    CONTEXT
    Just as the agrarian age, the age of religion, the bronze age, the iron age, and the steel age radiated outward from different points on the planet, causing disruption, modernity is spreading from the most advanced countries in Northwest Europe to the least advanced, and the most independent and federal to the most occupied and imperial.

    In other words, we overestimate world wars as avoidable. They aren’t. They are part of the necessary progress from early tribal, to agrarian imperial, to industrial-sovereign to post-industrial federation as each empire comes to terms with their loss of ability to contain conquered peoples – and prevent the march of self-determination from spreading around the rest of the planet.

    China and Russia are empires. They consist of predatory and deeply corrupt governments of organized crime syndicates. Unlike the Russians who did, and are returning to, the militarization of the labor pool as a discount, China could use currency and debt to discount the costs of their modernization. The Chinese learned from both Russia and the West.

    India may have escaped the modernization crisis – or rather colonialism removed their choice – though the Hindu-Muslim conflict may yet bring it about. India is, despite its modernization, and the vast talent pool of its upper classes, fundamentally a religious society first. It has just as equal a chance to continue its rise, as it does to follow the Muslim golden age into the restoration of fundamentalism and face india’s second intellectual collapse.

    Iran is in the process of trying to create an empire. An empire that monopolized Eurasian petroleum, from which they create a petro-currency, with which to fund their conquest of the middle east.

    Under strong federalism in response to the civil war, and under managerialism and credentialism in the 20th century, America has slipped from a federation organized on the Holy Roman Empire combined with the invention of the British modern government and law, into an empire – at the cost of its founding populations, its law, and the culture that made it possible. Just as have other empires that have overextended. Especially Europeans who repeat overextension with disturbing frequency.

    Europe is failing, or rather, France is failing (thankfully), to federalize Europe into a strong federal version of the USA while at the same time the USA is struggling with NOT devolving back to its constitutional formation as a military, financial, and trade alliance of independent European states, with different norms, traditions, values, and demand for regional and local commons to support those differences. (Which I work to accomplish)

    With Germany overly pacified, Poland on the behalf of itself, with less than half its population and economy, is taking over responsibility once again for defense from the east. and we may see the intermarium states turn into the civilization we’d hoped for, and end both the French and Russian threat, while Germany recovers her willpower.

    Continued…

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1627048026161430529

  • Adam, (all) RE: “The Neuroticism Obsession vs the Oppression Obsession” 1) The m

    Adam, (all)
    RE: “The Neuroticism Obsession vs the Oppression Obsession”

    1) The majority of studies, (and my own research) suggest that the incentive to pursue conspiracy theories originates in feelings of alienation and being out of control in life – because they are true. As such conspiracy theories are means of self-sedation. And that sedation can evolve into an obsession – or what’s a form of addiction.

    2) Feeling out of control, paranoia and self-sedation is consistent across sex differences with conspiracy theories on the right, and male, and oppression theories on the left and female. (Sexes differ in means of expressing antisocial behavior. And the variation in cognitive and emotional dimorphism is evident in the distribution of biases and behaviors in the population.)

    3) The diagnosis of Narcissism is being delegitimized in the vernacular. First, it’s natural for people to disagree. Natural for people to place higher confidence in their bias over that of others. But more so because it is a coping mechanism (means of self-sedation) against developmental challenges or trauma.

    4) So while the claim of narcissism (largely a male behavior) is common, the evidence is that the female oppression narrative is much more endemic, females have and express higher trait neuroticism, magical thinking, and hysteria, and female mental illness and obsession with oppression narratives are one of the most significant mental health crises of our age.

    The question is only why conspiracy theories and oppression narratives are necessary for sedation in a population, and whether the increase is material or one of visibility, and whether it’s caused by alienation isolation and a failure to replace religious indoctrination as the traditional prophylactic with some substitute such as stoicism or Buddhism (and physical fitness for that matter).

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-19 14:10:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627309634837966849

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626632891307261965

  • ANSWER –“how much can you trust a feeling?”– 1) All emotions are reactions to

    ANSWER
    –“how much can you trust a feeling?”–

    1) All emotions are reactions to change in state of ‘something of value to you’ (an asset, a demonstrated interest) whether potential gain, gain, retention, loss, potential loss. And whether the form of our body, action, time, habit, knowledge, relationship, thing, association, organization, commons … anything we have an interest in. (interest in the legal sense, not in the mental sense.)

    2) We may correctly or incorrectly interpret the legitimacy of our interest in (right to) what it is that we value whose state is, or may change.

    3) We may correctly or incorrectly morally and ethically interpret the legitimacy of ours or others’ interest in (right to) what is changing.

    4) In the sense that you ask the question, ‘Can we trust our emotions?’ we can trust that they are caused by something or other that we believe has changed state (most often our status or self-image than anything else, since status and self-image largely determine access to opportunities), we cannot trust whether these emotions are ‘true, useful, ethical, moral’ practical, or selfish, petty, childish, immature, antisocial, criminal, or evil.

    5) We are different from chimps (and they are not good, kind, or nice or virtuous creatures by any means) largely because we have developed sufficient agency (self-reflection and impulse suppression) so that we don’t retaliate against anything but that we must retaliate against given our environment.

    -Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-19 06:58:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627200873561563138

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627158909885747206

  • Continued: YOU PAY NOW OR LATER The strategy of NATO is to bleed Russia in a pro

    … Continued:

    YOU PAY NOW OR LATER
    The strategy of NATO is to bleed Russia in a proxy war through Ukraine. This is working though there is no end in sight. Because Russia never gives up a battle before losing half a million men (even if it has only 8M of age to draw from), and because Putin will be killed if he steps down. So, RU is “betting it all” restoration of the Russian empire. And his escalation path was obvious the moment we recognized he was reserving costly air power.

    Now, we can appease the Russians (French, Iranians, Chinese et al,) or we can pay cheaply now or expensively later.

    The reality is that until RU has a change of government and a change of strategy that encourages it to adopt rule of law and federalism ‘with Russian characteristics’, we cannot integrate them into european civilization, and must eventually fight a very scary war. (we must recognize that RU must maintain imperial status over its territories for the same reason the USA needed to reach the west coast: to create strategic safety.)

    So just as RU is playing for time, we are playing for time, both of us in the hope that the other side tires. This is the safest game.

    That said, I suspect that I am correct that RU will use air to shut off supply routes into UA, threaten tactical nuclear weapons against the UK, Nordics, or Baltics, and then continue its traditional strategy of just leveling anything in front of them.

    Meanwhile, the USA is not increasing the production of military ammunition (bullets, RPGs, Manpads, Missiles, Bombs) necessary to either conduct a war of self-defense, or to supply the already promised and paid-for weapons due to our allies for their defense.

    -FIN-

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-18 20:51:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627048105995796480

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627025797239431170

  • RT @ContraFabianist: @curtdoolittle The right intuits the hierarchy of cooperati

    RT @ContraFabianist: @curtdoolittle The right intuits the hierarchy of cooperative scales as demonstrated in aversion to the overextension…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-17 21:52:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626701077922938881

  • RT @ContraFabianist: @curtdoolittle Scales of cooperation as a Hierarchy of deci

    RT @ContraFabianist: @curtdoolittle Scales of cooperation as a Hierarchy of decidability:

    Decidability by natural limits>action (possible)…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-17 21:52:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626701038781702146

  • PART II: THE SCIENCE OF DECIDABILITY APPLIED TO LAW In my work, I want to solve

    PART II:

    THE SCIENCE OF DECIDABILITY APPLIED TO LAW

    In my work, I want to solve the problem of preserving decidability, the science of the natural law of cooperation, constitutions of it, common law, and concurrent legislation under it.

    So in this sense, I judge constitutions,…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-17 17:23:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626633443629989900

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626633306555940882

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    Q: “Curt doesn’t know as much about the law as he thinks he does.”
    A: Good argument. I haven’t passed a bar exam. And I would never want to ‘lawyer’ for a living.

    However, there is a difference between extant jurisprudence and ‘lawyering’ as thought and practiced, vs the science of decidability, uniting the sciences with it, applying that science by completing the natural law program (scientific law), and reforming constitutions, legislation, regulation, and findings of the court, and then a reformation of the law, constitution, institutions, legislation, regulation, and findings of the law.

    In other words, there is a difference between a scientist, an engineer, and a craftsman. Judges and lawyers are craftsmen. They practice ‘lawyering’, as said by our dearly deceased Saint Judge Antonin Scalia. I work on and produce the science and logic (computability) of law proper and its application to legislating, judging, and lawyering.

    PART 1
    PART 2

    PART 1:

    WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE?

    1. Well, the practice of law “Lawyering” consists largely of knowing:

    … a) How to research and argue law. Any decent law school professor will say they’re teaching you how to think about the law. But you’ll forget most of what you learn in law school quickly. It’s more important that you know how to read, interpret, apply, and argue local, state, federal and constitutional law than it is that you recall everything in the body of law.

    … b) In particular, the law of Civil and Criminal Procedure. Meaning the terms, processes, and procedures of conducting ‘lawyering’ in court. Civil procedure is the most important subject in law school, because it consists of the rules within which you can conduct your ‘lawyering’. The difference is criminal procedure sets a high bar for the state and a very high bar for defending individual’s rights against the state.

    … c) Some depth in whatever specialization(s) of the law you work within. People tend to specialize in very difficult matters (criminal) difficult (tax, technology, corporate, mergers and acquisitions, international law) or in mass market law (divorce, family, bankruptcy, civil court), or in the big boy games of appeals, supreme court.

    In reality, if you read documents from a few cases, especially in appeals courts, you can judge a lawyer by his or her arguments as easily as you can any other student papers in college. 😉

    .. d) The problems that arise in expectations of the people vs lawyers and judges. It’s hard for inexperienced people to imagine the many ways people commit harms or crimes. But the court doesn’t have to imagine, it has encountered them and has to decide them. So, that means the courts have to account for all varieties of complex human interactions and interactions between those actions and laws. So the court defends against things you would never do by design, but are still violations of the law. And your opponent’s desire is to cast your actions as intentional – even if ignorant or accidental. In other words, the scope of reasonable conditions that each of us assumes is small than the scope of actions the courts account for. This is why those of us who specialize in legal theory prefer simple laws. And it’s why the court grants you the benefit of the doubt if it can do so.

    … e) the law as practiced is neither what’s promised to us, what’s moral, or what’s ethical. (This is what I work on fixing). And you must ‘get over it’ to practice law. (I can’t and won’t get over it. I’d rather fix the law instead. 😉 )

    ( more in Part II … )

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1626633306555940882

  • Dear Lord, Professor, Saint @elonmusk ;), (All) Yes, we can build a TruthGPT. Ye

    Dear Lord, Professor, Saint @elonmusk ;), (All)

    Yes, we can build a TruthGPT.
    Yes, I know how. I’m a nerd. 😉
    You have no reason to believe me.
    People who follow my work do.
    I had to solve the Truth problem for an AI that could test law, constitution, legislation, regulation, and speech for truthfulness.

    I have too much on my plate reforming law for the same reason (Truth, Possibility, Legality, Legitimacy), to start another company to produce on an AI – though it’s something I’ve worked on and planned for years.

    TSLA could easily produce a TruthAI, and Twitter could use and AI produced by TSLA. The world would benefit from a TruthAI more than any technology… well…, other than a safe battery with N-times the energy density of gasoline. 😉

    For anyone interested:

    1. The embodiment that TSLA uses for cars and robots is necessary for world modeling, and world modeling is necessary for categorization (identification) from context.

    2. Route Finding in vehicles and robots is necessary for Recursive Wayfinding (thinking and problem-solving.)

    3. Novelty Detection and World Modeling combined with Way Finding are necessary for episodic memory. Memories favor novelties.

    4. Object, Space, and Background classification, combined with episodes (contexts) are necessary for sufficient disambiguation to determine ‘ownership’ and predictions.

    5. If you study linguistics you quickly realize that universal morality is embedded in all our languages (particularly English because it’s a high-precision low-context language) in the form of permission to act on a person, object, space, class, etc.

    6 So, moral AI that respects life and demonstrated interest (property) and even negotiates over control and transfer of interest is pretty simple.

    7. The next higher-order problem then is one of speech (truth). While justificationary truth is impossible (yes really) survival of falsification is possible (yes really).

    8. There is one simple logic to the universe at all scales that provides us with the opportunity for a constructive falsificationary logic. (That was the hard part)

    9. The hard bit for the next generation to swallow, is that there is a relatively simple set of criteria for *universal falsification of statements* and a *universally commensurable paradigm, grammar, vocabulary, logic, and syntax* – Yes really.

    When written or spoken language using this ‘grammar’ looks and sounds like a bit tedious form of ordinary language. And this tedious form can be reduced to ordinary language on output.

    In other words, we can and have produced a non-cardinal, ordinal, qualitative, geometry of language that can test the possibility of any speech or text’s testifiability (truth). And we can and have produced a rule set (checklist) for Truthful(testifiable), ethical(direct), and moral(indirect) questions.

    THE PLAYERS TODAY AND WHY TSLA MATTERS

    TSLA vs Google vs OpenAI use three different models. OpenAi is the simplest, Google’s a bit more challenging, and TSLA’s the most difficult.

    Now, we require TSLA’s world model to create an AI that can continuously recursively and in real-time produce truth tests.

    And we need eventually neuromorphic hardware (many tiny simple processors with a bit of local memory) to circumvent the backpropagation cost problem (and the alternatives, and evolve closer to real-time learning. (FWIW recent innovations in solving the cost problem has been exciting and is gaining popularity – thanks to one of the fathers of the field.)

    The combination of local truth testing of tangible questions and escalation to distant central truth testing for increasingly abstract questions is the holy grail of imitating the human mind and its use of collective minds as a market for knowledge and decisions.

    (BTW: Thanks #TwitterDev for long-form tweets. It’s finally possible to inform with Twitter instead of just virtue signal and generate conflict by promoting viscous cycles of moral outrage for dopamine junkies. 😉 )

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-17 16:11:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626615439638798337

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626533667408596992