Curt Doolittle

Theme: Agency

  • Peterson likes to use them because as a therapist it allows him to use cognitive

    Peterson likes to use them because as a therapist it allows him to use cognitive behavioral therapy by suggestion thereby circumventing normal human resistance to persuasion.

    It’s why myths work. Its why they teach. It’s why we use them. He’s just applied it to therapy

    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-13 01:31:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271616105002434561

    Reply addressees: @yat_es @Salamandrens @Outsideness

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271615831458435074

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @yat_es @Salamandrens @Outsideness No, that’s not it. Its that anthropomorphism is the most intuitive system of measurement for man, requiring the least knowledge and experience, with similarity across civilizations, and when used in narratives can encode group strategy and a ‘logical’ paradigm within it.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1271615831458435074

  • It is in the nature of men, and especially conservative men, who are system thin

    It is in the nature of men, and especially conservative men, who are system thinkers to rely less on others and more on our own reasoning, and worse, on ‘private reasoning’ and this creates an artificial sense of low numbers. The liberals are a tiny loud perecentage.

    Reply addressees: @Salamandrens @yat_es @Outsideness

  • It is in the nature of men, and especially conservative men, who are system thin

    It is in the nature of men, and especially conservative men, who are system thinkers to rely less on others and more on our own reasoning, and worse, on ‘private reasoning’ and this creates an artificial sense of low numbers. The liberals are a tiny loud perecentage.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-13 00:49:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271605633104646146

    Reply addressees: @Salamandrens @yat_es @Outsideness

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271586044471894016

  • Sorry. not insulting you. meaning the audience is not biased toward men who will

    Sorry. not insulting you. meaning the audience is not biased toward men who will act. And men who will act dont worry, thy just want a plan.

    Reply addressees: @EricLiford @jamesfoxhiggins @JohnMarkSays

  • Sorry. not insulting you. meaning the audience is not biased toward men who will

    Sorry. not insulting you. meaning the audience is not biased toward men who will act. And men who will act dont worry, thy just want a plan.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-12 21:46:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271559548155854854

    Reply addressees: @EricLiford @jamesfoxhiggins @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271519124007649280

  • Eric. Despite all your worthwhile activism you engage in far too much hand wring

    Eric. Despite all your worthwhile activism you engage in far too much hand wringing that projects your lack of confidence onto others. “Real men” don’t hang on social media. They are men of few words, and more deeds. They wait for us to produce something worth acting on.

    Reply addressees: @EricLiford @jamesfoxhiggins @JohnMarkSays

  • Eric. Despite all your worthwhile activism you engage in far too much hand wring

    Eric. Despite all your worthwhile activism you engage in far too much hand wringing that projects your lack of confidence onto others. “Real men” don’t hang on social media. They are men of few words, and more deeds. They wait for us to produce something worth acting on.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-12 17:03:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271488340668362752

    Reply addressees: @EricLiford @jamesfoxhiggins @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271476191342534659

  • –“Q: Curt, Is There a Secret to Running King of The Hill Games?”–

    Well, first, the reason you do it is (a) it’s participatory, (b) it attracts interest, (c) people will respond with what they really intuit, believe, feel. (d) so you (my case) get to do research on the different positions people hold. people can’t report truthfully. it’s impossible. They can’t NOT defend their moral and cognitive biases. This is why the technique works for research. It’s very hard to lie (mislead) in KOTH games. It’s your genes talking. Second, You’re trying to start a fight. There is a sort of art to it. You have to frame it so that it could be interpreted either way, and it’s going to antagonize the audience no matter what position they hold. After that you try to just ask questions that keep the fight going. In other words, you have to pick a position (flag) that someone wants to defend. So, you’re setting up game. A sport. A competition. In this way you teach the audience by the the audience teaching each other without you really doing much ‘teaching’ at all. The hard part is trying to make sure the audience isn’t sure of which position you hold, so that they argue the idea or each other and not you. I use all three methods: neutral question, positive position, opposite position. And I try to frame the ‘game’ (question) differently each time. Even though I only use like two or three dozen themes. I think of it like running plays in football, running scenarios in paintball, running skirmishes in military training, running mock trials in court, or debating scenarios in MBA courses. Players learn. The Spectators Learn. It’s Adversarialism. How men need and want to learn. Cheers

  • –“Q: Curt, Is There a Secret to Running King of The Hill Games?”–

    Well, first, the reason you do it is (a) it’s participatory, (b) it attracts interest, (c) people will respond with what they really intuit, believe, feel. (d) so you (my case) get to do research on the different positions people hold. people can’t report truthfully. it’s impossible. They can’t NOT defend their moral and cognitive biases. This is why the technique works for research. It’s very hard to lie (mislead) in KOTH games. It’s your genes talking. Second, You’re trying to start a fight. There is a sort of art to it. You have to frame it so that it could be interpreted either way, and it’s going to antagonize the audience no matter what position they hold. After that you try to just ask questions that keep the fight going. In other words, you have to pick a position (flag) that someone wants to defend. So, you’re setting up game. A sport. A competition. In this way you teach the audience by the the audience teaching each other without you really doing much ‘teaching’ at all. The hard part is trying to make sure the audience isn’t sure of which position you hold, so that they argue the idea or each other and not you. I use all three methods: neutral question, positive position, opposite position. And I try to frame the ‘game’ (question) differently each time. Even though I only use like two or three dozen themes. I think of it like running plays in football, running scenarios in paintball, running skirmishes in military training, running mock trials in court, or debating scenarios in MBA courses. Players learn. The Spectators Learn. It’s Adversarialism. How men need and want to learn. Cheers

  • Testimony

    —” When you’re confused and I’ve hit rock bottom and you don’t know why you suddenly come across people like Jordan Peterson who with his applied to advise helps you to build yourself back up into something more solidified. But after that you begin to think to yourself will how can we fix the whole of society then you start progressing more more towards Curt Doolittle’s way of thinking.”—Joshua Moye