Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • DO WE KNOW A UNIVERSALLY GOOD IDEA? Are there any Universally positive ideas? Un

    DO WE KNOW A UNIVERSALLY GOOD IDEA?

    Are there any Universally positive ideas? Universally negative ideas? Do we ever know what a universal positive idea is? Or do we ever only know what a universal negative idea is? Or is it the competition between an ever expanding inventory of what we know is false, and an ever expanding set of ideas we hope might yet be true?

    How do you produce both via negativa and via positiva so that, like the west in 4000-1200bc, in the ancient world from 600bc-100ad, and modern worlds from 1500-1900ad, we drag man to godhood -a and do not enter into a dark age that results when we stop?

    Or in this case, when we are stopped by barbarian invasion in the 1177bc, +300AD, and +1900ad?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-07 14:14:00 UTC

  • GENDERS: HOW ACCURATE IS THE r/K-SELECTION ANALOGY? —“some people are saying r

    GENDERS: HOW ACCURATE IS THE r/K-SELECTION ANALOGY?

    —“some people are saying r/K selection doesn’t apply to humans because we are just on a spectrum of K.”— A Friend

    (I am going to … suppress my urge to point out just how stupid it is to assume reproductive strategies are binary rather than graduated. … I want to smack people who run around confusing an analogy, describing theoretic observations, with an axiomatic statement. sigh…. Now, on to an explanation. )

    I think all of us know that r/K isn’t a binary system. But the fact that the female intuition and the underclass strategy mirrors r-selection (numbers) and the male intuition and upper class strategies mirror k-selection is a useful point for illustrating the different moral and cognitive biases of male and females that we see expressed in all walks of life, including voting patterns.

    I mean, I take it for granted everyone knows that when you select for neoteny you get decreasing dimorphism, and less exaggerated differences between the male and the female. Largely by domesticating the male (aggression) in both genders.

    WE ARE ALL A BLEND OF TRAITS.

    All five (six) major human personality factors(traits) (including intelligence) are marginally indifferent between the genders, but the expressions of these major personality traits in the corresponding ten(twelve) sub-traits differs greatly between the genders in stereotypical ways – just what you would expect.

    So we are all either more masculine or more feminine – which is observable in facial features and body types. (feminine/gracile, masculine/massive). And the greater the level of domestication (neotonic selection) the more likely we will create gender issues and start seeing ill effects in both genders. Hence the necessity for replacing genetic influence with developmental influence (training) so that we produce less ‘conflict’. (Hence why jewish men all seem ‘gay’ and we think (correctly) that those with more heavy features (bigger jaws, bigger noses, bigger brows, darker and more even hair and eye coloring, curlier hair) are more primitive. (‘Cause they are.) I mean. i say this as a guy with an ‘atlantic’ barrel chest, very wavy hair, lots of body hair, despite my rather gracile features, temperament, blue eyes and light brown hair.

    TOO MUCH OF A GOOD THING

    Now, you can have too much of a good thing. The east asians have taken it too far (less so the japanese). So, lIke I say frequently; I am pretty sure that we passed peak human. The point at which no further neoteny is valuable. And instead, the problem is culling the lower classes. And I would suggest that the aryans were pretty much ‘peak human’ at their time, and the Dutch prior to the 19th century were pretty much modern peak human. And that we have mostly seen decline since then, leaving the white russians and the ukrainians and the poles and the north germans peak human. IMHO the Finns are not far off the mark today just not as advanced as the Dutch were (or the norman aristocracy). (Much to the chagrin of the rest of the world, turns out that the tall, gracile, blonde, big round head, thing is right. Genetically superior, with an even distribution of verbal and spatial intelligence. )

    REVERSAL

    Hopefully, it seems that we might have been saved by science this time, despite losing 100 YEARS!!!! to marxist, feminist, postmodernist deceit, pseudoscience, and pseudorationalism.

    if so, we can prevent the second dark age caused by abrahamism: the art of lying through massive repetition.

    You wonder why prayer and chanting prayer works? Same reason abrahamic lying works.

    Repetition.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-07 14:08:00 UTC

  • BAD BEHAVIOR: IS IT RACE, CLASS, CULTURE, SINGLE MOTHERHOOD, WHAT? (good stuff)

    BAD BEHAVIOR: IS IT RACE, CLASS, CULTURE, SINGLE MOTHERHOOD, WHAT?

    (good stuff)

    —“Question: What’s the causal link between single parenthood and child dysfunction/criminality? Certainly in America the criminality has risen when single parenthood did also. Now, the right generally seems to argue it’s because of the necessity of the family, the left blames it on racism, and the HBD/Biodiversity folk attributes it to purely genetics. Nobody can give a straight answer and they all contradict each other. What’s your neutral take on it? It’s driving me a little mad”— A Friend

    “All happy families are the same. All unhappy families are different. All happy people are the same. All unhappy people are different. All domesticatable animals are the same. All undomesticatable animals are different.”

    A lot of things ‘have to go right’ to make a good person, and any of tem that go wrong makes a less good person. There are a LOT OF THINGS that can go wrong.

    The more FREEDOM (social agency) you have in a society, the more dependence upon your abilities (genes), training (socialization and norms), and education (marketable skills).

    So what you see in the world is that IQ very much reflects what you can do in a society. Because the society must accommodate the majority. So the dumber the majority the less freedom. The smarter the majority the more freedom. This is why westerners work by science, technology, rule of law and the one principle of the golden/silver rule, and why islamists for example simply are trained by the use of religion and repetition like small children or even domesticated animals. that difference is one standard deviation (one intellectual-species deviation) in lower average intelligence. The problem is that unlike the Africans who are more pro-social than we are (for obvious reasons – they kill each other pretty often otherwise), the islamic religion advocates aggression.

    Under-domestication of underclasses, poor quality personality (iq/industriousness), low investment parenting, lack of socialization that provides what low investment parenting does not (getting your ass kicked if you’re an asshole) and the difference in the size of the underclasses between the races so that we actually DO discriminate against one another (correctly) unless we act and dress Conformatively.

    So the answer to what goes wrong with single motherhood? ALL OF THE ABOVE. A single mother, working, living alone, with low IQ cannot distribute the tasks of feeding, *training*, educating, a child, unless his genetics and peers are so favorable that he can be insulated from competition and hardship. In other words, ALL CHILDREN ARE INFANTILIZED by our current educational system because of de-socialization of the right kind (survival) and socialization of the wrong kind (the industrial school system that lacks social competition). And that’s just the beginning of the problem.

    The single-parent problem is only a problem because we have just enough money to live in our own apartments with a mother and child without (a) depending upon one another for survival and therefore socializing properly, or (b) providing in-family socialization and discipline, and (c) providing sufficient social skills and productive skills to find work in a modern economy.

    Markets in everything matter. The market for socialization in a distribution of ages is more important than accelerating the rate of reading mathematics and sciences. There is no evidence that it makes any difference whatsoever.

    Sports, socialization, big extended families for everyone below the professional +120 class.

    I have run out of interest in this topic for the moment but it warrants about double this length.

    We have to abandon ‘all kids are equal’ and ‘all people are equal’ and realize that we have mixes of good and bad traits and saturation in the markets for survival familial/intergenerational, social/inter-class+gender, and economic/inter-skill requires training. And to make a person achieve that in modernity requires training in a particular skill we have abandoned: mindfulness.

    My problem with abrahamic religion is that it seeks to produce mindfulness through deceit. My preference for stoicism, even over buddhism, is that it is both literary and scientific, and requires no falsehood even if myths, literature, and histories are all exaggerations for the purpose of illustrating what might otherwise be invisible in a sea of tedious normalcy.

    The difference is that it is CHEAP to lie (abrahamic religion) and perform nonsense rituals, and it is EXPENSIVE to tell the truth (stoic virtue disciplines).

    And it is possible that some percentage of people (although I doubt it) are below the intelligence spectrum for Stoicism, and that we must achieve through repetitive imitative training (by doing) what stoicism asks us to achieve by repetitive discipline (by doing) ourselves.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-07 12:03:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-07 06:11:00 UTC

  • Not sure if you have seen or posted the transcript of Trump’s speech. He says so

    Not sure if you have seen or posted the transcript of Trump’s speech. He says some interesting stuff about nationalism.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-07 06:09:00 UTC

  • Putin probably doesn’t know how to talk to Trump. Trump ‘might’ know how to talk

    Putin probably doesn’t know how to talk to Trump. Trump ‘might’ know how to talk to Putin. You don’t get cunning with Putin or any Russian. You think of something practical. “The world needs us to be allies. How can we get you what you want? what do you need to make that happen?”

    I”m praying anyway.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-06 18:40:00 UTC

  • IT IS DONE. PAYBACK FOR THE LEFT ISN”T SO GOOD? I remember when professors were

    http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/05/cnn-staff-reeling-after-personal-info-leaked/HOW IT IS DONE.

    PAYBACK FOR THE LEFT ISN”T SO GOOD?

    I remember when professors were threatened by black panthers and told to teach different versions of history.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-06 18:35:00 UTC

  • IT’S MY JOB, OK? It’s ok to ask questions. It’s my job. I prefer they consist of

    IT’S MY JOB, OK?

    It’s ok to ask questions. It’s my job. I prefer they consist of complete sentences. And reasonable grammar is ever-so-nice. And I don’t give job or dating advice if I can help it. lol

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-06 17:32:00 UTC

  • REDMOND/BELLEVUE: YOU ARE THE NEXT ROCHESTER You know, I said all this would hap

    https://www.yahoo.com/tech/microsoft-cuts-3-000-jobs-focus-cloud-171151815.htmlDEAR REDMOND/BELLEVUE: YOU ARE THE NEXT ROCHESTER

    You know, I said all this would happen. I said they couldn’t course correct. I said WHY they couldnt’ course correct. And I was right that Ballmer was the reason it wouldn’t be able to course correct. There is no replacement generation.

    They cannot buy a way into competency. Microsoft management culture and organizational cultures is Toxic.

    Not gonna happen. It won’t be a decline like Kodak, but it will be a decline like Xerox. And for the greater seattle area it will make the Boeing debacle in the 70’s look like a bad hair day.

    You become your parents if you aren’t careful. (IBM)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-06 16:44:00 UTC

  • SO GENETICS AND POLITICAL SYSTEMS MATTER? The difference between regional groups

    SO GENETICS AND POLITICAL SYSTEMS MATTER?

    The difference between regional groups, even territories in europe, is produced by the duration under (a) agrarianism, and (b) manorialism in particular, and (c) the form of crops. These three factors determine the current i) iq/personality distributions of various ethnic subgroups, ii) the size of the underclass because of that difference in distributions, iii) the family type used by that group, iv) the moral bias of that group v) the voting patterns of that group.

    In other words, the greatest improvement in the standard of living that you can provide for your people, is a reduction in the rate of reproduction of those in the lower and underclasses. Period. Nothing else comes close. It determines everything from norms to trust, to institutions that are possible, to the size of companies that you can form, and the ability to form sustainable patterns of specialization and trade.

    In other words, the reason the east and west were so successful is that (a) homogenous kin – the least diverse people on earth, (b) the use of manorialism to starve out the underclasses or reduce their numbers, and (c) aggressive culling of the underclass in the west by hanging up to 1% of the population per year after 1000ad, and by very aggressive use of the axe (head chopping) in east asia for thousands of years (the symbol of authority in china was the axe).

    The chinese are the oldest civilization and have succeeded in neotonic selection more so than any people on earth – to the point where it has become problematic. Europeans slightly less so, and from a later branch of homo sapiens sapiens. The rest of the world has NOT done this. And has neither the cold winters or agrarianism long enough to reduce the underclasses, and give opportunity for neotonic selection.

    We can easily demonstrate this by the testosterone levels and endocrine differences between the populations. at present we can demonstrate it in the ten subtypes of personality traits below the big five personality traits, but the universal test of neoteny is IQ, which is a fairly accurate predictor of the reduction and intensity of sexual maturity produced by neotonic selection.

    This is the most parsimonious explanation of the variation in racial (latitudinal), sub racial (generation), and tribal and class difference in the world. It means, that just as Belyaev’s Foxes, we can speciate extremely quickly, within a few generations if we select only for neotonic (calmness). Which turns out is producible by as simple a thing as reducing testosterone. Possibly even accounting for eye and hair color variation – although that is still an open question.

    So,

    (a) left, socialist, communist, equalitarian produces r-selection and r-selection moral intuitions (what we call beta or feminine or child-driven) and (b) right, aristocratic, meritocratic, egalitarian, k-selection (alpha or male, or tribe-driven) evolutionary strategies are all we are ever arguing about.

    All our prattle is just negotiation on behalf of our genes.

    So, just as the copernican revolution was profoundly humiliating the current revolution in biology and social sciences is profoundly humiliating.

    The world is a very simple thing: reduce underclasses and then the middle to upper classes will work together just fine. But because below about 105, people start becoming a burden, the primary problem we face, and the world faces, is not global warming, or pollution, but finding some way to morally cull populations under 105 (current measure) by a one-child policy for long enough that we equilibrate the vast underclasses with the advanced civilizations. Otehrwise the problem of india is going to be the world;s problem -everywhere.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-06 16:00:00 UTC