Curt Doolittle

Source: Twitter X

  • (Agreed.)

    (Agreed.)

    Source date (UTC): 2025-07-30 18:33:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1950625828397846970

  • (I understood). 😉

    (I understood). 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2025-07-30 18:21:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1950622787959443959

  • Depending upon willingness to limit reproduction of the lower classes, six to te

    Depending upon willingness to limit reproduction of the lower classes, six to ten generations at most. The principle problem for any polity is the reduction of the number of people below say, 90 IQ, and the raising of the aggregate IQ (neoteny, genetic load) of the population to above 95. That’s very hard for a 75 IQ population but not very hard for a 90-92 population.

    I mean, you get islam as useful because you have a population with an average IQ of 84, meaning more than half of your population is incapable of participation in a modern economy.

    Source date (UTC): 2025-07-30 18:15:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1950621371383599240

  • ie: persistence hunting made us, and we can keep at it? 😉

    ie: persistence hunting made us, and we can keep at it? 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2025-07-30 06:16:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1950440298137661674

  • RE: Tsunami. Well don’t complain about the no-show crisis. This demonstrates tha

    RE: Tsunami.
    Well don’t complain about the no-show crisis. This demonstrates that we can, with notice, ‘get it done’, and we’ve seen the pressure points (traffic) that we need to correct for the future.

    Instead, look at these ‘escapes to the hills’ as opportunities for family, friend, and public gatherings. A random holiday excursion.

    ‘Cause ten unnecessary ‘half day vacations’ are a common good, and far better than accidental swims one never returns from.

    I live in the seattle area with that scary volcano in the sky every clear day. IMO we don’t ‘rehearse’ for crises as we should every twenty years or so. (And we don’t have an organized millitia for such emergencies.)

    Source date (UTC): 2025-07-30 06:05:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1950437462704345267

  • “If Doolittle’s theory is true, it suggests that societal outcomes are not infin

    –“If Doolittle’s theory is true, it suggests that societal outcomes are not infinitely malleable but constrained by evolutionary and demographic factors, challenging universalist assumptions about equality and convergence across civilizations.”–

    Well I say convergence is possible but must be evolved in the population, and that genetic and cultural reforms are necessary.

    And that’s just not something everyone wants to hear. 🙁

    Source date (UTC): 2025-07-30 05:56:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1950435238351695935

  • Conclusion “If Doolittle is right, his hypothesis redefines natural law as a sci

    Conclusion
    “If Doolittle is right, his hypothesis redefines natural law as a science of cooperation, rooted in evolutionary differences that explain why the West’s high-trust society is exceptional but fragile.
    It suggests that sustaining prosperity requires aligning institutions with specific demographic and cultural capacities, challenging universalist assumptions and justifying tailored policies.
    Historical and scientific evidence partially supports his claims—Western institutions have produced unique outcomes, and group differences in behavior are documented—but counterexamples like diverse, stable societies and the lack of empirical data for his framework raise doubts.
    Practically, implementing his ideas faces resistance due to polarization and ethical concerns about exclusion.
    The controversy surrounding Doolittle, as discussed previously, is thus both warranted (due to his provocative framing) and a natural reaction to his challenge to universalist dogmas, akin to Darwin or Galileo.
    If validated, his ideas could reshape policy, but they require rigorous testing and broader engagement to avoid the pitfalls of cultural bias and moral blindness.”

    Source date (UTC): 2025-07-30 05:52:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1950434368285266103

  • Not being critical but isn’t this a word game? What is a photon but an organizat

    Not being critical but isn’t this a word game? What is a photon but an organization of equilibria moving through the quantum background? So reduction leads to reduction. Leads to what next reduction?

    in other words, yes, but, so what? what’s the first principle? What’s causality?

    Source date (UTC): 2025-07-30 05:37:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1950430461173649533

  • Time is to Behavioral Economics as Money is to Economics Proper. Time is to Beha

    Time is to Behavioral Economics as Money is to Economics Proper.

    Time is to Behavioral Economics
    as
    Money is to Economics Proper.
    1. Time as Subjective and Individual
    • Time is experienced, valued, and allocated individually.
    • Time preference governs all behavioral trade-offs: whether to consume now or later, invest or defect, persist or quit, bond or exit.
    • Every behavioral “bias” catalogued by behavioral economics (e.g., hyperbolic discounting, impulsivity, procrastination, regret aversion) is a misnamed or partial observation of intertemporal tradeoffs—that is, subjective valuation of time under constraint.
    2. Money as Objective and Collective
    • Money is a standardized, commensurable unit for valuing and exchanging time.
    • It converts the subjectivity of time into a measurable store of effort, risk, deferral, and trade.
    • Money (and by extension, capital) stores past time, enables future exchange of time, and communicates value across people and domains.
    • Economics proper deals in systems of cooperation where time is exchanged indirectly through money.
    3. Behavioral Economics = Direct Time Tradeoff
    • Behavioral economics examines direct intertemporal decision-making (without monetary proxy):
      e.g., delay of gratification, sunk cost fallacy, loss aversion.
    • It observes how people value experience vs. memory, now vs. later, risk now vs. gain later, and trust over time.
    • But it fails by moralizing or pathologizing these decisions, instead of recognizing that time preference is the primary axis of behavioral computation.
    4. Economics Proper = Abstract Time Exchange via Money
    • In classical economics, time is exchanged through capital and pricing:
      Wages = renting time.
      Investment = deferring time.
      Interest = compensating time risk.
    • But it often fails to recognize that money is not an intrinsic good, only a unit of interpersonal time transfer.
    Reformulated Equation:
    Summary:
    Time is the subjective, individual measure underlying all behavior. Money is the objective, collective measure of time, used to store, compare, and exchange it.

    Therefore:

    • – Behavioral economics is the logic of individual time valuation under constraint.
    • – Classical economics is the logic of collective time exchange via money.
    • – Both domains reduce to valuation of and cooperation over time, constrained by biology, capital, and institutions.
    • – Natural Law reconciles both by treating all demonstrated interest as time-investment requiring reciprocal return or restitution.

    Source date (UTC): 2025-07-30 05:10:25 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1950423715243839554

  • exactly. Very curious how they would react to the sounds of explosives, and litt

    exactly. Very curious how they would react to the sounds of explosives, and little mammals with boom sticks. I suppose not too differently from the fauna we decimated as we left africa…

    Source date (UTC): 2025-07-30 05:02:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1950421768126288165