Curt Doolittle

Theme: Agency

  • What You Do With “Smart” Matters A Lot

    [Y]ou can invest your neuronal development in increasing the explanatory power of very narrow concepts, or invest your neuronal development in increasing the explanatory power of very broad concepts. There are THREE reasons why we produce many very smart people in narrow niches, and very few very smart people in broad concepts.

    1) First, the return on narrow specializations is cheaper and quicker, and the return on broad specializations is very expensive and takes much, much, longer – if any returns exist at all. It’s very difficult to produce a Toynbee or a Durant. 2) Second, our education and our economies are organized to produce craftsmen for the industrial era – specialists, made possible and necessary by the entry of proles into the labor force, made possible by the harnessing of hydrocarbons. 3) Third, our education system no longer produces aristocratic learning for aristocrats who must govern. Even our aristocratic universities (religious schools) teach the religion of the proles (equality, democracy, pseudoscience, and deception). Instead of teaching politics, ethics, morality, finance and law, so that we may rationally organize our production and rationally adjudicate our differences, with the least risk, loss, and friction in both production and adjudication. So I am daily saddened by the tragedy of the many very smart people I meet who fail to produce their potential, and the many proles who fail by attempting to exceed their capabilities and capacities – due to the false promises of their priesthood. The only choice one has is independent study: to read. By reading ‘know thyself’. By knowing thyself (relative to the abilities of others) to find a niche to profit from, and to gain wisdom to understand the broader arena of human affairs. It is very easy to choose between that which is good to read, and that which is not: read the works of aristocracy. They are scientific in that they were empirical. They are the only equals man has made. See “The Importance of Being Well Read No Matter What Your IQ”. http://www.propertarianism.com/…/the-purpose-of-being-well…/ BECAUSE YOUR PRIESTHOOD: YOU ACADEMICS, PUBLIC INTELLECTUALS AND TEACHERS FAILED YOU – and they failed you in pursuit of selfish money and power. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Information Systems for the Persistence of Man

    SYSTEMS G-GENES, 0-PROPERTY, 1-INTUITION, 2-REASON, 3-COOPERATION(REPRODUCTIVE DIVISION OF PERCEPTION, COGNITION, KNOWLEDGE, LABOR)

    (profound) (worth repeating)

    [O]ur logical capacity extends to the limits defined by the flight of an arrow. For more complex multi-dimensional relations we resort to the cartesian representations. And if the problem is more complicated than that, then our reason, and ability to envision causal relations, is terribly frail.

    And if I am correct (and it appears at present that I am), then “System 0″ is little more than a producer of reward and punishment endorphins in response to increases or decreases in an individual’s inventory of “property”. Property that is necessary for his life, cooperation and reproduction.

    Emotions are reactions to changes in state. Changes in state are determined by changes in property. Humans act to acquire that which improves their condition. Humans resent and punish, at great personal expense, appropriations of that which they have acted to acquire.

    Reason (Stanovich’s System “2”) rides on the elephant of intuition (Stanovich’s System “1”), whose objects of consideration ( Doolittle’s System “0”) are what we call ‘property’. Our brains are difference engines. And we calculate differences in property: that which we have acted to obtain.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev.

  • Q&A: Why Do People Hold Increasingly Radical Positions?

    [W]hy do people increase radicalism when confronted with the failure of their ideology? Because they do not hold positions rationally, but to justify their intuitions, and their intuitions exist to advance their reproductive strategies (signals). And so they will fight to defend those signals at all costs, consistently escalating to the point of violence if necessary. Becuase one’s self-image and social status are one’s property. So one defends them accordingly. People change their positions only when they can both no longer see a successful use of their prior strategy, and they can now see how to use a new narrative to achieve their reproductive strategies. You can see this not only in individuals, but the broader political phenomenon.

  • Q&A: Why Do People Hold Increasingly Radical Positions?

    [W]hy do people increase radicalism when confronted with the failure of their ideology? Because they do not hold positions rationally, but to justify their intuitions, and their intuitions exist to advance their reproductive strategies (signals). And so they will fight to defend those signals at all costs, consistently escalating to the point of violence if necessary. Becuase one’s self-image and social status are one’s property. So one defends them accordingly. People change their positions only when they can both no longer see a successful use of their prior strategy, and they can now see how to use a new narrative to achieve their reproductive strategies. You can see this not only in individuals, but the broader political phenomenon.

  • No, self-discipline is a means of accumulating capital (creating inventory)

    No, self-discipline is a means of accumulating capital (creating inventory).

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-28 08:21:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/615072632262762496

    Reply addressees: @BourneAdequacy @Nero

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/614839020493873152

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/614839020493873152

  • Q&A: Curt. Where Does Pathological Altruism Come From?

    “Where does a memeplex based upon pathological altruism come from? And better yet, how to stop it?”—Ed Herzog

    [R]eally great question.  And it’s not that hard to deconstruct into reproductive intuitions.  We use contributory commons more than any other group on earth. So, it comes from: (1) Indo-European Heroism;  (Uniqueness of the west) (2) Status from Contribution to the Commons, and;(3) Obtaining Signals, even Self-Signals of Conspicuous Consumption using “other people’s money”.  Progressives tend to be less attractive mates (and it plays out in relationship statistics) so they compensate for reproductive inferiority by demonstrating verbal ‘plumage’ that they’re generous – albeit with other people’s cultural, institutional, genetic, and money capital. We North Sea Peoples are more vulnerable to it. It’s likely because it’s partly genetic. Others encourage it because it advances their power base, and relative status by declining ours. We stopped policing liars when we added women to the franchise. Between puritans, women, and jews, and the excuse of blacks, they were able to use numbers to weaken us enough that the Catholics and Jews could open the floodgates and turn the west into Brazil/India. That’s your answer. As far as I know that is a necessary and sufficient answer. And I suspect it will withstand the test of time.

  • Q&A: Curt. Where Does Pathological Altruism Come From?

    “Where does a memeplex based upon pathological altruism come from? And better yet, how to stop it?”—Ed Herzog

    [R]eally great question.  And it’s not that hard to deconstruct into reproductive intuitions.  We use contributory commons more than any other group on earth. So, it comes from: (1) Indo-European Heroism;  (Uniqueness of the west) (2) Status from Contribution to the Commons, and;(3) Obtaining Signals, even Self-Signals of Conspicuous Consumption using “other people’s money”.  Progressives tend to be less attractive mates (and it plays out in relationship statistics) so they compensate for reproductive inferiority by demonstrating verbal ‘plumage’ that they’re generous – albeit with other people’s cultural, institutional, genetic, and money capital. We North Sea Peoples are more vulnerable to it. It’s likely because it’s partly genetic. Others encourage it because it advances their power base, and relative status by declining ours. We stopped policing liars when we added women to the franchise. Between puritans, women, and jews, and the excuse of blacks, they were able to use numbers to weaken us enough that the Catholics and Jews could open the floodgates and turn the west into Brazil/India. That’s your answer. As far as I know that is a necessary and sufficient answer. And I suspect it will withstand the test of time.

  • HAVE BETTER SELF CONTROL (LOWER TIME PREFERENCE / LESS IMPULSIVITY ) [M]ore adva

    http://phys.org/news/2015-06-liberals.htmlCONSERVATIVES HAVE BETTER SELF CONTROL (LOWER TIME PREFERENCE / LESS IMPULSIVITY )

    [M]ore advanced (higher genetic class) less impulsive, less advanced (lower genetic class), more impulsive.

    We shouldn’t forget that impulsivity is a successful reproductive strategy really. Opportunism is a cheap strategy. Organized production is expensive.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-28 04:19:00 UTC

  • WHY DO PEOPLE INCREASINGLY HOLD MORE RADICAL POSITIONS? Why do people increase r

    WHY DO PEOPLE INCREASINGLY HOLD MORE RADICAL POSITIONS?

    Why do people increase radicalism when confronted with the failure of their ideology?

    Because they do not hold positions rationally, but to justify their intuitions, and their intuitions exist to advance their reproductive strategies (signals). And so they will fight to defend those signals at all costs, consistently escalating to the point of violence if necessary.

    Becuase one’s self-image and social status are one’s property. So one defends them accordingly.

    People change their positions only when they can both no longer see a successful use of their prior strategy, and they can now see how to use a new narrative to achieve their reproductive strategies.

    You can see this not only in individuals, but the broader political phenomenon.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-28 04:15:00 UTC

  • SYSTEMS G-GENES, 0-PROPERTY, 1-INTUITION, 2-REASON, 3-COOPERATION(REPRODUCTIVE D

    SYSTEMS G-GENES, 0-PROPERTY, 1-INTUITION, 2-REASON, 3-COOPERATION(REPRODUCTIVE DIVISION OF PERCEPTION, COGNITION, KNOWLEDGE, LABOR)

    (profound) (worth repeating)

    Our logical capacity extends to the limits defined by the flight of an arrow. For more complex multi-dimensional relations we resort to the cartesian representations. And if the problem is more complicated than that, then our reason, and ability to envision causal relations, is terribly frail.

    And if I am correct (and it appears at present that I am), then “System 0″ is little more than a producer of reward and punishment endorphins in response to increases or decreases in an individual’s inventory of “property”. Property that is necessary for his life, cooperation and reproduction.

    Emotions are reactions to changes in state. Changes in state are determined by changes in property. Humans act to acquire that which improves their condition. Humans resent, and punish, at great personal expense, appropriations of that which they have acted to acquire.

    Reason (Kahneman’s System “2”) rides on the elephant of intuition (Kahneman’s System “1”), whose objects of consideration (System “0”) are what we call ‘property’. Our brains are difference engines. And we calculate differences in property: that which we have acted to obtain.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-27 11:16:00 UTC