Source: Facebook

  • Social science experiment: Ask a few random women their opinion on an uncomforta

    Social science experiment:

    Ask a few random women their opinion on an uncomfortable truth.

    On a scale of:

    1-Shaming and rallying

    2-Shaming.

    3-Displeased.

    4-Denial.

    5-Excuse making.

    6-Uncomfortable agreement

    7-Tacit agreement.

    8-Factual acknowledgement

    9-Positive affirmation

    10-Elaborates upon it.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-09 05:35:00 UTC

  • numbers: republicans are the party of whites and democrats the party on non. Jus

    http://feedly.com/e/d_SCnbxVThe numbers: republicans are the party of whites and democrats the party on non. Just how it is and the trend will continue.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 21:34:00 UTC

  • (I dunno. This new video doesn’t need much editing really. I think I could provi

    (I dunno. This new video doesn’t need much editing really. I think I could provide points during, and a summary at the end, but really it’s pretty good as it stands. I could simply add titles to it and be done.)


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 20:57:00 UTC

  • Some rules of Critique: Overload: Control the conversation by volume and critici

    Some rules of Critique:

    Overload: Control the conversation by volume and criticism rather than contribution.

    Gossip: Heap undue praise on in-group members. It distracts from the real contributors, and floods the information system.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 16:20:00 UTC

  • UNIFICATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROHIBITION I have modified the structure of phil

    UNIFICATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROHIBITION

    I have modified the structure of philosophy in Propertarianism like this:

    Metaphysics

    >The Mind

    Epistemology

    Truth

    >Cooperation

    Ethics

    >Sociology

    Politics

    >Beauty

    Aesthetics

    Again, my purpose is to unite science and philosophy and to make the use of philosophy as a vehicle for deception much more difficult if not impossible. We cannot guard against the sub 106 population. It is in their interest to be told there is a free ride if they will follow. We can however, guard against the middle class members who always make use of the people of lesser ability by their deceptions.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 16:09:00 UTC

  • Great Term Of The Day: “Positive Here-say” – Juan Sebastian Ortiz

    Great Term Of The Day: “Positive Here-say” – Juan Sebastian Ortiz


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 13:45:00 UTC

  • SELF DECEPTION: THE ELEPHANT, THE RIDER, THE DEMON, AND THE MACHINE The “Rider”

    SELF DECEPTION: THE ELEPHANT, THE RIDER, THE DEMON, AND THE MACHINE

    The “Rider” may not be able to engage in self deception, but the “Elephant” can absolutely deceive the “Rider”.

    The Rider: Reason (System 2) (the calculative system)

    The Elephant: Intuition (System 1) (The “Search” system)

    The Demon : The Cooperative Instinct (System 0) (Biases Property to Reproductive strategy)

    The Machine : The “Property” Instinct : (System Null) (Acquisitiveness)

    I knew it was possible to engage in self-deception, but I wasn’t able to articulate it before. Since ‘self’ consists of three entities, and the ‘self’ we are cognizant of is only one of three agents, the elephant can train the rider. Easily it turns out.

    The Demon is not aware of itself, it merely responds to commands. The Rider is cognizant of the elephant, but the Elephant chooses between the rider and the Demon, and never tells the rider of the Demon.

    HUMANS ENGAGE IN SELF DECEPTION. THE SINGULAR SELF IS A FALLACY. THE ARGUMENT AGAINST SELF DECEPTION DEPENDS UPON THIS FALLACY.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 13:19:00 UTC

  • Moral, Ratio-Empirical Libertarians. Must tolerate the truth. Immoral, Rationali

    Moral, Ratio-Empirical Libertarians. Must tolerate the truth.

    Immoral, Rationalist Libertines. Must engage in deception.

    Immoral dysgenic progressives. Must justify their immoral dysgenia.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 12:34:00 UTC

  • CURIOUS: CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS As a CEO my style is very American: meaning liber

    CURIOUS: CULTURAL OBSERVATIONS

    As a CEO my style is very American: meaning libertarian in management: I try to create as much of a bottom-up organization as possible with as little management as possible, and to attract the best talent possible, because the best talent wants to demonstrate creative expression – in a country where creative expression is a competitive value.

    The general thinking in the states is that employees know customers the best and so we need to empower them to serve customers. We get profits from helping them serve customers. The more we help them the more profits we make. The increase in credit capacity and the petro dollar has not been good for us in this respect, because it has given consumers a lot of free money to inflate the economy while reducing our discipline. In Europe consumers are much ‘poorer’ by every possible measure and so companies must fight for their attention. Conversely, people are much more patient with companies and regulations and rules than americans would be. So the culture tolerates the business climate and visa versa.

    But where this shows up is lack of rotation in Europe, and less radical innovation, while we get better engineering out of germans (again, who I think ‘do it right’) in education at least – if not in an oppressiveness that is beyond my comfort. And without the humor that my anglo peers survive on. 🙂

    I wonder how Oversing will play in european countries? Will europeans be able to handle(tolerate) that much transparency? That much honesty? That much measurement? That much social rather than hierarchical feedback? That much customer service? Or will just young competitors make use of such a product? Or will more hierarchical companies turn off the transparency and use it as command and control? Young people get it. Technology people worldwide seem to get it. Ukrainian’s get it. Russians get it. South American’s get it.

    Hmmm…. What else….

    In the states we try to push independent thinking farther down the chain than is possible. And we don’t train the bottom to be capable. We pretend everyone can become a member of the middle (or upper middle) class and fail the majority by doing so. (we have the world’s most absurd education system in that regard. for the upper half it’s awesome. but for the lower half its a tragedy.)

    Germany does it about right. They focus on making the lower half excellent and so the upper half has better assets to work with that way. And it shows. Maybe Finland does it better. But they have a more homogenous society to work with so they can create a better universal educational system. But Finn’s are too timid in business. Germans are the most honest after americans. I notice that it’s actually easier to deal with germans than other americans and I have to stop myself from couching everything inoffensively when talking.

    I don’t really understand the UK system. And I have had very bad experiences there. So maybe I’m biased. People turn out more literate. The middle turns out pretty well and the top excellent. But the bottom is… not as bad as the states in incompetence, but worse than the states in rent seeking behavior. Our bottom end can’t find work but they don’t try to avoid it. I don’t understand the class in the UK that seeks to avoid labor at all costs, and do the minimum whenever possible. It could be that class exists all over Europe but I only have access to it in the UK and Canada. And it’s really visible to me in both the UK and Canada.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 11:53:00 UTC

  • OMG I FORGOT TO DOWNLOAD AND EDIT THE NEW VIDEO!!!! Guess I have work to do toni

    OMG I FORGOT TO DOWNLOAD AND EDIT THE NEW VIDEO!!!!

    Guess I have work to do tonight.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 11:24:00 UTC