DECIDABILITY 10 Law, 20 History 30 Science 40 Philosophy 50 Mythology (Literature) 60 Religion 70 GOTO: 10
Source: Original Site Post
-
Fascism Won. Eugenicists Were Right.
Um. Fascism = Monopoly. Everyone wants a monopoly – whether left right or center. The west however rose at its unprecedented pace in the ancient and modern worlds, under tripartism and markets for cooperation, while maintaining underclass eugenics (suppression). So basically fascism won. The ‘examples’ being set for the rest of the world are china, russia and saudi arabia – a trend in the research that was identified in the 90’s. Democracy in the 19th and 20th and the French Revolution’s counter-empiricism will be, as in the ancient world, remembered as nothing more than a revolt made possible by temporary excesses in income made possible by european technological superiority and the use of it in colonization. In less than a century that competitive advantage (capital) has been spent down, and the world is dividing again into large caste systems (india, south america, the muslim world) and nationalisms (china, japan, south korea). With the west by fully accidental means, choosing to follow india, south america, and the levant, into permanent class warfare.
-
Fascism Won. Eugenicists Were Right.
Um. Fascism = Monopoly. Everyone wants a monopoly – whether left right or center. The west however rose at its unprecedented pace in the ancient and modern worlds, under tripartism and markets for cooperation, while maintaining underclass eugenics (suppression). So basically fascism won. The ‘examples’ being set for the rest of the world are china, russia and saudi arabia – a trend in the research that was identified in the 90’s. Democracy in the 19th and 20th and the French Revolution’s counter-empiricism will be, as in the ancient world, remembered as nothing more than a revolt made possible by temporary excesses in income made possible by european technological superiority and the use of it in colonization. In less than a century that competitive advantage (capital) has been spent down, and the world is dividing again into large caste systems (india, south america, the muslim world) and nationalisms (china, japan, south korea). With the west by fully accidental means, choosing to follow india, south america, and the levant, into permanent class warfare.
-
The Inversion of the IQ Controversy.
THE INVERSION OF THE IQ CONTROVERSY The IQ Controversy misses the point that it is not so much exceptional ability, which exists in all groups, that is so demonstrably advantageous for the GROUP, but the relative absence of lack of ability at the bottom end that is advantageous for the group. In other words, one can raise the average IQ of a group by trying to increase the number at the top, despite regression to the mean, or one can reduce the number at the bottom thereby changing the mean to which populations regress. And while we now know that lower intelligence is the product of accumulated defects, and that higher intelligence is the produce of eliminating defects, not necessarily any particular gain, the problem should be fairly obvious in that the greatest investment peoples can make in their present and future is the suppression of reproduction in the lower classes in exchange for redistribution.
-
The Inversion of the IQ Controversy.
THE INVERSION OF THE IQ CONTROVERSY The IQ Controversy misses the point that it is not so much exceptional ability, which exists in all groups, that is so demonstrably advantageous for the GROUP, but the relative absence of lack of ability at the bottom end that is advantageous for the group. In other words, one can raise the average IQ of a group by trying to increase the number at the top, despite regression to the mean, or one can reduce the number at the bottom thereby changing the mean to which populations regress. And while we now know that lower intelligence is the product of accumulated defects, and that higher intelligence is the produce of eliminating defects, not necessarily any particular gain, the problem should be fairly obvious in that the greatest investment peoples can make in their present and future is the suppression of reproduction in the lower classes in exchange for redistribution.
-
—“Curt: Whats the most inspiring philosophical text you’ve read?”—
(a) Inspiration is something I don’t really need, which is why I don’t see philosophy as self-help but decidability. (c) I don’t read philosophy except to understand how previous generations of thinkers have failed. (really). Instead, I read science and art history, both of which are *demonstrated*, not fantasized (as is philosophy). In fact, I still read philosophers and generally thing “OMG this is sh-t”. (b) The only books I can recall inspiring me were those of history, particularly military history, and within that group ‘Strategy” by Liddel-Hart, and the history of the Mongols. I consider my study of the mongols my first really independent research program outside of arts and sciences. (e) And whether you consider Sun Tsu, Alexander, Caesar, Machiavelli, Napoleon, Clausewitz, and Keegan philosophy or military strategy and history is a question of bias in categorization. (d) I can only remember being affected heavily by Hayek’s two papers on knowledge, less so his work on law, and more so Popper and Kuhn’s work on scientific epistemology. In my understanding of history I have combined nietzsche’s aryanism, hayek’s knowledge and law, weber/mises/simmel’s calculation problem, completed popper’s epistemology, and Hoppe’s reduction of all social science to statements of property (tort). (e) In aesthetics I was affected by rand’s romantic manifesto in no small part because my university’s art college was based upon it – and it stuck with me HARD. (f) You might call Simmel’s “The Philosophy of Money” a book on philosophy or work of social science. I deem it the latter. And I read Weber, Durkhiem, and Pareto to understand economics for the same reason. (g) You might call Nietzche’s Birth of Tragedy philosophy but I consider it social science. I respect nietzsche but I don’t read him for philosophy or inspiration (I find german literature ridiculous), but I did try to understand how he failed to produce a more scientific program for his insight into heroic ethics. SO WHAT I HEAR FROM PEOPLE WHEN THEY ASK ME ABOUT PHILOSOPHY: is there a literature in ordinary language that I can read as a shortcut to understanding? And the answer is I don’t think so. And I am pretty sure you will learn more from following me for two years than you will learn from any study of philosophy. Not because I”m particularly good, but because I’m actually a scientist, and most philosophers have been tragic. I started with history, then science, then artificial intelligence, and then economics. And so my ‘route’ to wisdom was scientific not literary. cheers Apr 20, 2018 11:40am
-
—“Curt: Whats the most inspiring philosophical text you’ve read?”—
(a) Inspiration is something I don’t really need, which is why I don’t see philosophy as self-help but decidability. (c) I don’t read philosophy except to understand how previous generations of thinkers have failed. (really). Instead, I read science and art history, both of which are *demonstrated*, not fantasized (as is philosophy). In fact, I still read philosophers and generally thing “OMG this is sh-t”. (b) The only books I can recall inspiring me were those of history, particularly military history, and within that group ‘Strategy” by Liddel-Hart, and the history of the Mongols. I consider my study of the mongols my first really independent research program outside of arts and sciences. (e) And whether you consider Sun Tsu, Alexander, Caesar, Machiavelli, Napoleon, Clausewitz, and Keegan philosophy or military strategy and history is a question of bias in categorization. (d) I can only remember being affected heavily by Hayek’s two papers on knowledge, less so his work on law, and more so Popper and Kuhn’s work on scientific epistemology. In my understanding of history I have combined nietzsche’s aryanism, hayek’s knowledge and law, weber/mises/simmel’s calculation problem, completed popper’s epistemology, and Hoppe’s reduction of all social science to statements of property (tort). (e) In aesthetics I was affected by rand’s romantic manifesto in no small part because my university’s art college was based upon it – and it stuck with me HARD. (f) You might call Simmel’s “The Philosophy of Money” a book on philosophy or work of social science. I deem it the latter. And I read Weber, Durkhiem, and Pareto to understand economics for the same reason. (g) You might call Nietzche’s Birth of Tragedy philosophy but I consider it social science. I respect nietzsche but I don’t read him for philosophy or inspiration (I find german literature ridiculous), but I did try to understand how he failed to produce a more scientific program for his insight into heroic ethics. SO WHAT I HEAR FROM PEOPLE WHEN THEY ASK ME ABOUT PHILOSOPHY: is there a literature in ordinary language that I can read as a shortcut to understanding? And the answer is I don’t think so. And I am pretty sure you will learn more from following me for two years than you will learn from any study of philosophy. Not because I”m particularly good, but because I’m actually a scientist, and most philosophers have been tragic. I started with history, then science, then artificial intelligence, and then economics. And so my ‘route’ to wisdom was scientific not literary. cheers Apr 20, 2018 11:40am
-
Degree vs IQ – And Where I Get My Categories.
ROUGH DISTRIBUTION OF IQ BY DEGREE. Now, what these distributions tell us is that the Minimum IQ for university level courses (calculations) is > 120 rather than the past > 115. And That means, again, that all university degrees are nonsense under 120, and that this vast debt does nothing but indoctrinate people into the cult of the state. — Learn by invention – 130 Physics 129 Mathematics 128.5 Computer Science 128 Economics 127.5 Chemical engineering 127 Material Science 126 Electrical Engineering 125.5 Mechanical Engineering — Learn by research — 125 Philosophy 124 Chemistry 123 Earth Sciences 122 Industrial Engineering 122 Civil Engineering 121.5 Biology — Learn by reading- 120.1 English/Literature 120 Religion/Theology 119.8 Political Science 119.7 History 118 Art History 117.7 Anthropology 116.5 Architecture — Learn by instruction- 116 Business 115 Sociology 114 Medicine (nursing etc) 112 Communication (marketing) 109 Education 106 Public Administration — Learn by imitation – ( … ) to 93. — Learn by repetition- ( … ) to 85. — Limited ability to learn – ( … ) below 85 IN PRISONS AS WELL – THE BOTTOM DETERMINES THE MEDIAN —âWe definitely donât understand the entire package as far as how IQ explains the process leading to an inmate engaging in misbehavior,â Morris said. âItâs more about IQ playing a role, and that itâs not only about a particular personâs IQ, but itâs about collective IQ in an environment of confinement.”—
-
Degree vs IQ – And Where I Get My Categories.
ROUGH DISTRIBUTION OF IQ BY DEGREE. Now, what these distributions tell us is that the Minimum IQ for university level courses (calculations) is > 120 rather than the past > 115. And That means, again, that all university degrees are nonsense under 120, and that this vast debt does nothing but indoctrinate people into the cult of the state. — Learn by invention – 130 Physics 129 Mathematics 128.5 Computer Science 128 Economics 127.5 Chemical engineering 127 Material Science 126 Electrical Engineering 125.5 Mechanical Engineering — Learn by research — 125 Philosophy 124 Chemistry 123 Earth Sciences 122 Industrial Engineering 122 Civil Engineering 121.5 Biology — Learn by reading- 120.1 English/Literature 120 Religion/Theology 119.8 Political Science 119.7 History 118 Art History 117.7 Anthropology 116.5 Architecture — Learn by instruction- 116 Business 115 Sociology 114 Medicine (nursing etc) 112 Communication (marketing) 109 Education 106 Public Administration — Learn by imitation – ( … ) to 93. — Learn by repetition- ( … ) to 85. — Limited ability to learn – ( … ) below 85 IN PRISONS AS WELL – THE BOTTOM DETERMINES THE MEDIAN —âWe definitely donât understand the entire package as far as how IQ explains the process leading to an inmate engaging in misbehavior,â Morris said. âItâs more about IQ playing a role, and that itâs not only about a particular personâs IQ, but itâs about collective IQ in an environment of confinement.”—
-
The Constitution – A third way.
(via Quora) Our constitution was the best yet written, because it attempted to create a âthird wayâ alternative to church or state under Natural Law – a middle class country – but it has been fairly easy to circumvent for the simple reason that the supreme court has no vehicle for âreturning law to the congressâ, and therefore can legislate from the bench. As far as I know the basis of common law is optimum (natural law of tort) and the level of detail in continental law is less open to circumvention. Our political system is outright bad, with parties, prime ministers and a monarch empirically superior by all the evidence. While conceived as a loose collection of states like europe, we have failed to preserve the independence of the states, and the presidency, and the majority election of the president, has only reinforce that problem. As such we have a continent-wide empire where everyone is always angry because each state or region has a different culture with different social, economic, political, and strategic demands. Apr 20, 2018 8:31pm