Source: Facebook

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. LANGUAGE CAUSES OVERESTIMATION OF SIMILARITIE

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    LANGUAGE CAUSES OVERESTIMATION OF SIMILARITIES

    We all have a will to power, but we also have physical, mental, and emotional resources to obtain it with; and that will is countered by fear and insecurity.

    Language is as natural as walking. But it causes us to overestimate our similarities. Empathy causes us to overestimate our similarities. Submission causes us to overestimate our similarities. Need causes us to overestimate our similarities. And a host of our cognitive biases evolved to convince us we are normal, or average, or like everyone else. But despite all those cognitive biases, we are demonstrably not all that similar in MARGINAL difference in the performance of emotional, cognitive, and physical tasks.

    We can often judge someone’s ability by their vocabulary and their reasoning – language is how we measure (diagnose) the mind. But the fact that we can speak to people across the human spectrum tells us nothing about our marginal (effective) differences.

    In fact, those cognitive biases for similarity(indifference) may be nothing other than an adaptation to the use of language, by providing us with greater imitation(of actions), sympathy(for wants), and empathy(for feelings), so that we more readily comprehend one another’s use of language so that in turn we may more readily reap the rewards of opportunities for the high returns on cooperation.

    The more Empathic, Sympathetic, Needful, and Vulnerable we are, the more incentive we have to find similarities (female) and the Dispassionate, Analytic, Independent, and Dominant we are the more incentive we have to identify and preserve our dissimilarities.

    Now think about that a little bit.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 12:22:22 UTC

  • (Іноді я так сильно скучаю над Україною, що це болісно, найкращих людей у світі,

    (Іноді я так сильно скучаю над Україною, що це болісно, найкращих людей у світі, яких я коли-небудь зустрічав, найщасливіший я коли-небудь був, я не можу чекати, щоб закінчити свою роботу і повернутися).


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 12:21:00 UTC

  • FULFILLING YOUR NEEDS The reason you want a narrative and an ideology is so that

    FULFILLING YOUR NEEDS

    The reason you want a narrative and an ideology is so that you can feel in a group and in control in a world where you have none. But the only control you have is over your understanding of that world and your interpretation of that world. So narratives are inhibitors not enablers.

    Propertarianism (Natural Law) will absolutely positively provide you with a consistent, correspondent, and coherent science, grammar, and logic with which to understand describe and interact with the world.

    Stoicism (Self authoring in goals and virtues) will absolutely positively provide you with the mindfulness to control your interpretation of that world.

    Restoration of our historical civilization to sovereignty, reciprocity, duty, truth, and markets in all aspects of life will allow us to achieve our individual interests within the limits of available knowledge and resources, as well as defend ourselves from primitive competitors, and if necessary conquer and govern them, and if left no other choice, to eliminate them.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 12:02:00 UTC

  • I have a few questions if you don’t mind. 1) –“Besides Ostrom, what can I read

    I have a few questions if you don’t mind.

    1) –“Besides Ostrom, what can I read if I want to understand more of the commons?”–

    Honestly, I don’t think there is else much worth reading. I would read the history of the common law which is in my book list. And I would read my definition of property in toto.

    2) –“Who would you consider influential in the Chicago school for the insurer of last resort argument for the state?”–

    Becker and Friedman. Becker for method, and Friedman for Solutions, Hayek for integration with law, Coase for institutions. Just go thru the list of famous people from Chicago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_school_of_economics

    3) —“And lastly, where can I read more on the proposed propertarian financial/monetary/banking system?”—

    I haven’t categorized (tagged) that group of ideas on the site, so it’s spread all over the place. I can’t spend 30 minutes doing a bunch of searches right now but I can think of a few that might be helpful. But understand, this is a very small part of the program:

    1) https://propertarianism.com/2016/12/10/whats-your-position-on-ubi-welfare-2-0/

    2) ***DE-FINANCIALIZATION:

    Definancialization of the Financial System. There is no reason we pay interest on consumer loans (and every reason we pay it on business and industrial loans).

    By nationalizing Mastercard, and issuing one every LEGAL AND FULLY INTEGRATED citizen, we can distribute liquidity (increase the money supply) by direct redistribution to the citizenry (in which case our homes would all be paid for because of the last recession), and consumer loans can be provided directly from the treasury.

    Furthermore, by professionalizing ‘banking’ (basically requiring series 7 for issuing loans via the treasury, and licensing as we do CPA’s), we can eliminate consumer interest, and cut payment periods in half or to one third. Additionally we make universities carry the zero interest loans on behalf of any student, and to obtain payment as a payroll deduction over a period of no more than ten years.

    This combination will mean that after about 15 years, the first time home owner will own his home free and clear, and the universities will no longer be able to offer junk degrees. I won’t go into the various extraordinary (wonderful) other consequences but this will restore the american people’s way of life and destroy the predatory financial, academic, and government sectors. There will be no other way to profit than the Silicon Valley (monarchy) model of investment in research, development, and industry.

    Financialism will be destroyed forever.***

    4) —“If I understand correctly, you’re proposing 100% reserves under fiat,”—

    No, you must publish your ratios at all times, and hold to any ratio whenever a debt was initiated.

    You many not transfer originated debt. You can sell interest in that debt but must carry it.

    And lastly, given that most consumer lending would be from the treasury and without interest, this would apply largely to commercial relations.

    5) —“while having at least two if not more parallel monies, one for savings (probably a gold standard) and one as a means of exchange (fiat e-cash),”—

    Multiple monies in general. I think my view is of far more than two.

    6) —-With savings and investments happening under private banks while current accounts controlled by central bank). Is that correct?”—-

    I see individual agents having relationships with the central bank for consumer credit, and very little need for them, without a bank as an intermediary.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 11:49:00 UTC

  • REJECTING BRETT WEINSTEIN’S METAPHORICAL TRUTH (Same as rejecting Jordan Peterso

    REJECTING BRETT WEINSTEIN’S METAPHORICAL TRUTH

    (Same as rejecting Jordan Peterson’s Darwinian Truth)

    (Same as rejective Mathematical Idealism)

    (Same as rejecting all fictionalisms – ‘Conveniences’)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 11:25:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a memory

    Curt Doolittle shared a memory.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 11:17:00 UTC

  • Retweeted Butch Leghorn (@PoseidonAwoke): @curtdoolittle Academia is the modern

    Retweeted Butch Leghorn (@PoseidonAwoke):

    @curtdoolittle Academia is the modern church, full of falsehood. The youth see fleeing Christianity and flocking to fake science.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 11:16:00 UTC

  • (two hundred friend requests. and a lot of sock/alts, (((bad folk))), and spamme

    (two hundred friend requests. and a lot of sock/alts, (((bad folk))), and spammers to wade thru. Sorry it is taking me too long. I run out of patience after about a dozen.)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 10:58:00 UTC

  • TWO PARTY SYSTEM NEUTRALIZES IQ DIFFERENCES • In both the U.S. and Denmark intel

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289618300060THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM NEUTRALIZES IQ DIFFERENCES

    • In both the U.S. and Denmark intelligence failed to predict standard party choice.

    • This was due to opposing effects of intelligence on economic and social ideology.

    •Denmark’s multi-party system allows non-standard representations of party choice.

    •In Denmark, significant systematic intelligence differences observed between parties.

    Intelligence is rarely studied as a predictor of vote choice, and at first glance our data supports this neglect: In samples from the U.S. and Denmark (Ns = 1419 and 953), intelligence does not predict the standard operationalization of vote choice in which parties are placed on a single left-vs-right dimension. (Standardized coefficients predicting right-wing vote choice were 0.05 and −0.03, respectively.)

    However, this apparent non-effect in fact reflects approximately equal and opposite effects of intelligence on vote choice as transmitted through social and economic ideology. In both countries, higher ability predicts left-wing social and right-wing economic views.

    The impact of intelligence on vote choice is thus most visible in true multi-party systems like Denmark, in which parties do not simply pair similar levels of social and economic conservatism, but instead provide diverse combinations of social and economic ideology.

    Comparing the parties closest to representing authoritarian egalitarianism (social-right plus economic-left) and libertarianism (social-left plus economic-right), we observed a 0.9 SD intelligence gap.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289618300060


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 10:54:00 UTC

  • TWO PARTY SYSTEM NEUTRALIZES IQ DIFFERENCES • In both the U.S. and Denmark intel

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289618300060https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289618300060THE TWO PARTY SYSTEM NEUTRALIZES IQ DIFFERENCES

    • In both the U.S. and Denmark intelligence failed to predict standard party choice.

    • This was due to opposing effects of intelligence on economic and social ideology.

    •Denmark’s multi-party system allows non-standard representations of party choice.

    •In Denmark, significant systematic intelligence differences observed between parties.

    Intelligence is rarely studied as a predictor of vote choice, and at first glance our data supports this neglect: In samples from the U.S. and Denmark (Ns = 1419 and 953), intelligence does not predict the standard operationalization of vote choice in which parties are placed on a single left-vs-right dimension. (Standardized coefficients predicting right-wing vote choice were 0.05 and −0.03, respectively.)

    However, this apparent non-effect in fact reflects approximately equal and opposite effects of intelligence on vote choice as transmitted through social and economic ideology. In both countries, higher ability predicts left-wing social and right-wing economic views.

    The impact of intelligence on vote choice is thus most visible in true multi-party systems like Denmark, in which parties do not simply pair similar levels of social and economic conservatism, but instead provide diverse combinations of social and economic ideology.

    Comparing the parties closest to representing authoritarian egalitarianism (social-right plus economic-left) and libertarianism (social-left plus economic-right), we observed a 0.9 SD intelligence gap.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-14 10:54:00 UTC