Curt Doolittle

Theme: Agency

  • THE ZONE REQUIRES FREE ASSOCIATION WITHOUT EXTERNAL “INFECTION” —“A man of imm

    THE ZONE REQUIRES FREE ASSOCIATION WITHOUT EXTERNAL “INFECTION”

    —“A man of immense creativity and endless ideas, Balzac was yet a creature of habit; indeed, a fixed routine was a large part of his success. He isolated himself from the world so that he could concentrate on his writing. He did this in two ways: first, by staying in his home with the blinds drawn,§- and second, by working at night while the world slept. Unless you distance yourself from the ceaseless distractions of the everyday world, like most successful writers (Conrad locked himself into a room, Salinger wrote in a concrete bunker, Fleming completed all the Bond novels in a Jamaican hideaway), unless you take steps to isolate yourself from the madding crowd, distractions are liable to make sustained work impossible. But perhaps even more than isolation, Balzac’s secret was coffee. His procedure was to keep himself alert during the wee hours of the night with murderously black and concentrated and above all thick-brewed coffee, which he made in a big coffeepot and sipped while he worked. He was so fond of coffee that he devoted a chapter to it in a scientific treatise on modern stimulants, singing its praises in glowing terms “[C]offee is a great power in my life,” he confessed. “I have observed its effects on an epic scale.” It kept him awake at night and enabled him to write. It stimulated his creative powers. It allowed him to marshal his thoughts. It gave him so many ideas he could barely keep up with them and his fingers flew across the pages, writing novel after novel at breakneck speed.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-21 15:32:00 UTC

  • DEFENSE AGAINST AD HOMS (ART) 0) I started writing fiction in first grade. I rea

    DEFENSE AGAINST AD HOMS (ART)

    0) I started writing fiction in first grade. I read … a lot. I never went anywhere without books (plural).

    1) I wrote my first 100+ page book at 13. (it was interesting but formulaic and terrible. I did a lot of drawing (very good) in pencil. And then pen and ink. I did a weekly comic (esoteric) in college ridiculing the college. lol.

    2) I have years of one of the best art theory schools in the world behind me. I was taught by full time practicing NY based artists, most of some note, during the end of the minimalist period and the re-transition to craftsmanship. The oddities that might interest you is that the staff chose Rand’s art theory as the basis of the program. I still think it’s her most important work, no matter how brief.

    3) In our university you could take creative writing every semester – I did. I’ve studied literature, fiction (yes they are different), and film. (Ya think I wasn’t just as obsessive about the writing discipline as I am about everything else?)

    4) I’ve been teaching the creative process for years. There are good books on it. They all say the same thing. I just explain what’s going on in your brain to legitimize the explanatory evidence. In other words, we know why the authors of those books are correct.

    5) the art of writing is pretty much a science at this point. We vary in our ability to sentence-make, and I use Hemmingway (a sequence of photos), and dickens (every sentence a balanced aphorism – almost impossible to imitate), King (good characters) and Heinlein bad characters) as myth makers; flemming; macdonald, and clancey as modern hero makers; pynchon and mccarthy as ‘literature’, and Herbert and now Martin as World Makers. (I avoid the 20th socialist authors entirely.)

    6) Pretty much every successful author works today by the same methods. It’s much easier when you know what it is you need to accomplish next and only need to help your characters and the reader get there. (I have the two main writer’s apps but I find I don’t really need them except for outlining because i write arguments instead of scenes and there is no art to organizing them. I prefer to write in a text editor with indent capability. )

    I don’t do painting because I lack the color facility (badly). I don’t do sculpture because it’s all but financially impossible today, and the marxists and pomos have destroyed the art. I don’t do movies ’cause the biz is skeevy and all but the writers shallow – seriously so. (writers tend to be interesting.) And I don’t write reviews of art because most of what I would say would be negative and it would be repetitious and tedious for for the reader. I have occasionally written about some of the arts, and will teach a class at the institute in art history and theory – I have it outlined, but I have to get ‘adapted’ to my new situation a bit more, and finish the Foundations Course before I produce it – and the military and the economic courses…. But I’ll go toe to toe with any critic on the arts no problem.

    I choose philosophy as my art, because it suits me – no materials other than a laptop internet connection and time. I’m an entrepreneur to fund my social science experiments and information gathering – and because working for others when I was younger was exasperating. I’m an artist because I practice the creative method as my primary skill. I like to fight because I was raised in a period where one had to. 😉

    -hugs )

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-21 15:10:00 UTC

  • Most right wingers focus on self improvement but most military action is a funct

    Most right wingers focus on self improvement but most military action is a function of teamwork not individual achievement. Your primary weapon is physical fitness. Eighty percent of weapon… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=489530324977196&id=100017606988153

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-21 14:05:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186282288444776448

  • (health update) (personal) (for close followers) As most followers know I have a

    (health update) (personal) (for close followers)

    As most followers know I have a rather obsessive thought pattern common to the autism spectrum. Aside from reduced empathy and exaggerated systematizing it’s really the only symptom I have to deal with. But, this ‘talent’ makes it extremely difficult for me to switch contexts, and switching contexts is somewhere between frustrating and aggravating’ because it’s so difficult – My mind wants to constantly work on (obsess on) one problem or another. And for most of my life this has been extremely advantageous as you can imagine. Collecting reams of information isn’t work. Learning isn’t work. Working isn’t work. Not collecting information, not learning and not working is work. It’s like having a gravity well for your attention that’s relentless as being in a loud steam powered factory, and you have to feed it constantly to keep it at peace. It can be useful especially in the current era. And I’m sure it was also useful as a hunter-gatherer, and we are clearly adapted to long winters, in cramped quarters with others indoors. I would have no problem working away on whatever winter crafts in communal space in a Scandinavian long house, or Saxon hut. None at all. Watching my sister, mother, grandmother, its pretty easy to see her extremely happy in that environment.

    But over the past two years (since I’ve come back to the states to care for family) my productivity has suffered because in my current environment I’m not able to insulate myself from stimulation and get ‘into the zone’ very often, and when I do it’s for short time periods. I’ve managed huge progress on the grammars, on religion, and on the operational description of human consciousness because it’s just information consumption and contemplation. But when I move from problem solving to ‘authoring’ it’s like pulling teeth. So this summer I’ve been trying everything in order to up my productivity to previous levels despite the ‘environment’.

    My daughter Caitlin manages drug field trials for medical research, and has the same behavior (as did my grandmother, my mother (less so), my sister, and my niece, my other daughter (who is classified as mildly autistic), and my niece. My son manifests it slightly differently.) She suggested that I ask my doctor to try migration from OCD treatment (reduce resistance) to ADHD treatment (stimulation), because it would allow me to work, and switch contexts without depending upon coffee.

    The effect has been rather immediate and obvious, in that context changes, and cognitive tunneling seem to have been radically reduced; my need to use physical motion or talking to myself to break out of the ‘cognitive well’ seems eliminated; with the only side effect being that ‘what comes to mind comes out of the mouth’ a bit more rapidly. And given my plentiful and hyperbolic sense of humor I might have to be careful.

    Everyone in family and extended family has noticed, immediately and they say something along the lines of “you’re here” or “you’re present” rather than constantly detached (focused on whatever I’m thinking). Yet I can easily switch topics and return to work, break from work, and return to it again, easily.

    So cross fingers, think good wishes, or say a prayer that this works and I can get more of this done before the boogaloo happens.

    Hugs all. Thanks for your participation, encouragement, support, and most of all – patience.

    Revolution Comes.

    -Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-21 12:42:00 UTC

  • Most right wingers focus on self improvement but most military action is a funct

    Most right wingers focus on self improvement but most military action is a function of teamwork not individual achievement. Your primary weapon is physical fitness. Eighty percent of weapon effectiveness is learned in the first few weeks. That’s why riflement defeated professional warriors ending the feudal era.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-21 10:05:00 UTC

  • Did you know that about a third of women have some form of mental illness? That

    Did you know that about a third of women have some form of mental illness? That the spectrum of female to male brain structure is psychotic to autistic? That hyper solipsistic empathising is borderline psychotic? And that moralising doesn’t scale or account for costs?

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-20 14:20:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185923825235562506

    Reply addressees: @LadyAodh

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185922461373812739

    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/1185922461373812739

  • Masculine and Feminine Anti-Social Behavior

    Masculine and Feminine Anti-Social Behavior https://propertarianism.com/2019/10/19/masculine-and-feminine-anti-social-behavior/

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-19 23:25:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185698396499300353

  • Masculine and Feminine Anti-Social Behavior

    Now, for men, you know, we get stressed trying to preserve an edifice, but we’ll eventually adapt to one if it means membership in a Team – because we have quite a bit of agency. Men tend to physically demonstrate anti social behavior. But ‘Crazy Chicks’ have a much harder time: they demonstrate anti-social behavior interpersonally and socially and they have lower agency – greater impulse – on average in the first place. Men are also more likely to live in physical and abstract reality where women more likely to live in (spend cognitive prediction in) emotional, interpersonal and social reality – all of us spend time in different distributions of sensory, physical, emotional, social, and abstract thought, which only reinforces the same emphasis over time. This means that while men and women have similar difficulties suppressing anti-social behavior, that (a) men’s are less tolerable but harder to mask (b) women’s are less visible and easier to mask. And the principle problem with ‘crazy chicks’ is that they can preserve the mask until they can’t, and when they can’t they hyper-react interpersonally and socially and never stop, whereas men hyper-react physically but eventually stop. All identified categories of human action are of necessity hyperbolic – maximizing our ability to disambiguate causality, and search and identify causes of instances – and all individual instances consist of multiple competing influences each of which we categorize hyperbolically out of necessity. This is the scientific method applied to high causal density. The opposite technique – again favored by women who engage largely in empathy(experiential, specific, and inter-personal) rather than largely systematizing(material, general, and political) – is to conflate and not disambiguate and instead empathize for the purpose of education or compromise. Where men disambiguate and aggregate, for the purpose of establishing and maintaining or defending LIMITS. so women are much more bottom up in their social intuition (opportunities) and men much more top down (limits). So crazy chicks are far higher a population problem than ‘crazy men’ at present principally because they are not regulated as are crazy men, and they are not regulated as are crazy men because the range of their damage is interpersonal and rather than material and political. As such we must spend time either regulating crazy chick behavior as we have crazy men behavior, or we must reverse the influence of crazy chicks in politics. I know we can accept defeat and remove crazy chicks from politics. But I’m exploring how we can regulate and retrain crazy chicks like we do crazy men. Although it appears nearly impossible, there is some evidence that the use of psychedelics and training may help. Mental illness cannot be cured – and even rarely improved. But aberrant behavior might be curable. Trauma certainly is, and much of that behavior appears to be caused by trauma – even though many of those traumas are cumulative grains of sands rather than distinct catastrophic events.

  • Masculine and Feminine Anti-Social Behavior

    Now, for men, you know, we get stressed trying to preserve an edifice, but we’ll eventually adapt to one if it means membership in a Team – because we have quite a bit of agency. Men tend to physically demonstrate anti social behavior. But ‘Crazy Chicks’ have a much harder time: they demonstrate anti-social behavior interpersonally and socially and they have lower agency – greater impulse – on average in the first place. Men are also more likely to live in physical and abstract reality where women more likely to live in (spend cognitive prediction in) emotional, interpersonal and social reality – all of us spend time in different distributions of sensory, physical, emotional, social, and abstract thought, which only reinforces the same emphasis over time. This means that while men and women have similar difficulties suppressing anti-social behavior, that (a) men’s are less tolerable but harder to mask (b) women’s are less visible and easier to mask. And the principle problem with ‘crazy chicks’ is that they can preserve the mask until they can’t, and when they can’t they hyper-react interpersonally and socially and never stop, whereas men hyper-react physically but eventually stop. All identified categories of human action are of necessity hyperbolic – maximizing our ability to disambiguate causality, and search and identify causes of instances – and all individual instances consist of multiple competing influences each of which we categorize hyperbolically out of necessity. This is the scientific method applied to high causal density. The opposite technique – again favored by women who engage largely in empathy(experiential, specific, and inter-personal) rather than largely systematizing(material, general, and political) – is to conflate and not disambiguate and instead empathize for the purpose of education or compromise. Where men disambiguate and aggregate, for the purpose of establishing and maintaining or defending LIMITS. so women are much more bottom up in their social intuition (opportunities) and men much more top down (limits). So crazy chicks are far higher a population problem than ‘crazy men’ at present principally because they are not regulated as are crazy men, and they are not regulated as are crazy men because the range of their damage is interpersonal and rather than material and political. As such we must spend time either regulating crazy chick behavior as we have crazy men behavior, or we must reverse the influence of crazy chicks in politics. I know we can accept defeat and remove crazy chicks from politics. But I’m exploring how we can regulate and retrain crazy chicks like we do crazy men. Although it appears nearly impossible, there is some evidence that the use of psychedelics and training may help. Mental illness cannot be cured – and even rarely improved. But aberrant behavior might be curable. Trauma certainly is, and much of that behavior appears to be caused by trauma – even though many of those traumas are cumulative grains of sands rather than distinct catastrophic events.

  • That’s because you have no agency, no courage, and no knowledge. Conversely thos

    That’s because you have no agency, no courage, and no knowledge. Conversely those who have agency, have courage, and have knowledge think the opposite.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-19 19:24:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185637809308217345

    Reply addressees: @PaulB76720253 @irenaissancemn

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185637558547570688

    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/1185637558547570688