Theme: Agency

  • Free Will like most philosophical parlor games is just a sophism, that frames (b

    Free Will like most philosophical parlor games is just a sophism, that frames (by suggestion) choice as a via positiva dependent upon knowledge, rather than prediction from field consisting largely of errors (via negativa). A suitably complex robot, like us,…


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-17 22:07:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174082438508752896

    Reply addressees: @SamHarrisOrg

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1174075156681019392


    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/1174075156681019392

  • Uniting Conservatives with Understanding of One Another

    Let’s put this in scientific prose: Conservatism is a genetic disposition evidenced in cognition, emotion, and action, of higher disgust response, higher preference for hierarchy (division of responsibility and labor), higher loyalty response. The fact that churcy christians use religion, moral christians use moralizing, educated moral christians use history, and educated moral, scientific christians use science and law is just a function of whether one is more dependent upon intuition, social interaction, or abstract reason. In other words, we are unified in our disgust response, we differ in our means of information processing, and because we differ in our means of information processing, we differ in our means of expression, advocacy ad argument. And because we are resistant to adaptation without overwhelming evidence, hypersensitive to loyalty, and hypersensitive to hierarchy, we want everyone to adopt our means of information processing and means of expression, advocacy and argument. But despite our differences in expression, what remains consistent across the faithful, the moral, the rational, and the scientific spectrum of conservatives is the natural law and the natural law’s intolerance for disgusting behavior whether intellectual, emotional, or physical, and whether in private, or the commons. If you cannot accept our cognitive tribes of conservatives as all unified under the natural law regardless of means of expressing that natural law as divine law, as moral utility, as rational practicality, and as scientific necessity, then YOU ARE THE REASON THE RIGHT FAILS. The faithful are the largest problem because they cannot tolerate their dogma as consisting only of wisdom literature (analogy and advice) rather than truth (description and decidability). Yet to win together we must deliver unto god what is god’s (faith we cannot testify to) and deliver unto caesar what is his (truth we can testify to). We cannot unite behind one paradigm of thinking, advocating, and arguing. We can only understand that we share the same instincts, wants, desires, goals for the same biological reasons regardless of their origin, and that we are right to save ourselves, our people, and humanity from disgusting thoughts, feelings and actions whether public or private. Because disgusting thoughts, feelings, and actions are imitated and spread like any disease, and man is more vulnerable to diseases of the mind than he is to those of emotions and body. We argue, and I argue, the faithful are the weakness in our civilization. It was evangelical women who brought about the chain of events that led to our current condition. It was catholic voters that brought about the leftist politicians. It was christians who gave passage to the ‘others’ who are the enemy. It is christians who idolize the enemy and its history instead of themselves and their history. So we must not argue excuses, because each conservative tribe argues with excuses within its paradigm. The only paradigm we need share is that we must eradicate what is disgusting from ourselves, our families, our polities, aour nations, and the world. And whether your god is Jehovah, Sky Father, Odin, Aristotle, the Constitution of natural law or the laws of the universe, none of them will tolerate disgust, and we will not survive without cleansing the world of it, and the universe of it afterward. We all know evil and it is disgusting and we share our disgust of thought, feeling, word, and deed. They are the disease. We are the cure. If that is not a god’s purpose for us then I know no other.

  • Uniting Conservatives with Understanding of One Another

    Let’s put this in scientific prose: Conservatism is a genetic disposition evidenced in cognition, emotion, and action, of higher disgust response, higher preference for hierarchy (division of responsibility and labor), higher loyalty response. The fact that churcy christians use religion, moral christians use moralizing, educated moral christians use history, and educated moral, scientific christians use science and law is just a function of whether one is more dependent upon intuition, social interaction, or abstract reason. In other words, we are unified in our disgust response, we differ in our means of information processing, and because we differ in our means of information processing, we differ in our means of expression, advocacy ad argument. And because we are resistant to adaptation without overwhelming evidence, hypersensitive to loyalty, and hypersensitive to hierarchy, we want everyone to adopt our means of information processing and means of expression, advocacy and argument. But despite our differences in expression, what remains consistent across the faithful, the moral, the rational, and the scientific spectrum of conservatives is the natural law and the natural law’s intolerance for disgusting behavior whether intellectual, emotional, or physical, and whether in private, or the commons. If you cannot accept our cognitive tribes of conservatives as all unified under the natural law regardless of means of expressing that natural law as divine law, as moral utility, as rational practicality, and as scientific necessity, then YOU ARE THE REASON THE RIGHT FAILS. The faithful are the largest problem because they cannot tolerate their dogma as consisting only of wisdom literature (analogy and advice) rather than truth (description and decidability). Yet to win together we must deliver unto god what is god’s (faith we cannot testify to) and deliver unto caesar what is his (truth we can testify to). We cannot unite behind one paradigm of thinking, advocating, and arguing. We can only understand that we share the same instincts, wants, desires, goals for the same biological reasons regardless of their origin, and that we are right to save ourselves, our people, and humanity from disgusting thoughts, feelings and actions whether public or private. Because disgusting thoughts, feelings, and actions are imitated and spread like any disease, and man is more vulnerable to diseases of the mind than he is to those of emotions and body. We argue, and I argue, the faithful are the weakness in our civilization. It was evangelical women who brought about the chain of events that led to our current condition. It was catholic voters that brought about the leftist politicians. It was christians who gave passage to the ‘others’ who are the enemy. It is christians who idolize the enemy and its history instead of themselves and their history. So we must not argue excuses, because each conservative tribe argues with excuses within its paradigm. The only paradigm we need share is that we must eradicate what is disgusting from ourselves, our families, our polities, aour nations, and the world. And whether your god is Jehovah, Sky Father, Odin, Aristotle, the Constitution of natural law or the laws of the universe, none of them will tolerate disgust, and we will not survive without cleansing the world of it, and the universe of it afterward. We all know evil and it is disgusting and we share our disgust of thought, feeling, word, and deed. They are the disease. We are the cure. If that is not a god’s purpose for us then I know no other.

  • RT @NoahRevoy: If you have crazy people in your life you won’t be able to attrac

    RT @NoahRevoy: If you have crazy people in your life you won’t be able to attract sane people into it.

    Making better quality friends start…


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-17 13:05:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173946076358991873

  • So what? Crawling came first. Scent first. Black and white vision first. As far

    So what? Crawling came first. Scent first. Black and white vision first. As far as I know imitation(body), empathy(emotion), sympathy (mind), communication and physical transformation (tool making) all evolved in parallel because they’re all dependent upon the same faculties.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-16 21:29:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173710469183528960

    Reply addressees: @Semiogogue

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173709402215518209


    IN REPLY TO:

    @Semiogogue

    @curtdoolittle Nope. I’m concerned with marks. Words only matter insofar as they’ve heretofore been considered as the standard against which all other human communciation should be judged. I hold that words are secondary and contingent, and that writing came first.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173709402215518209

  • “The purpose of policy is to destroy the family”— I think you, like most victi

    —“The purpose of policy is to destroy the family”—

    I think you, like most victims of 20th C pseudoscience attribute greater agency to our intentions, and stated intent over external… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=466902770573285&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-16 14:48:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173609716687261696

  • To say its a conspiracy of intent would require intentionality of female anti-so

    To say its a conspiracy of intent would require intentionality of female anti-social expression (psychosis, promiscuity, undermining, reputation destruction). Instead, social super-predation (undermining) is instinctual for most; a political strategy some & deliberate for others.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-16 14:29:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173604838841769992

    Reply addressees: @GrkStav @karlbykarlsmith

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173603444822806528


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @GrkStav @karlbykarlsmith Learn the technique of false promise, baiting into moral hazard, pilpul (via positiva), critique (via negativa), and its common thread in the three monotheistic religions, marxism, pomo, feminism, and political correctness – but insightfully, the female strategy of undermining.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1173603444822806528


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @GrkStav @karlbykarlsmith Learn the technique of false promise, baiting into moral hazard, pilpul (via positiva), critique (via negativa), and its common thread in the three monotheistic religions, marxism, pomo, feminism, and political correctness – but insightfully, the female strategy of undermining.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1173603444822806528

  • (I think you, like most victims of 20th C pseudoscience attribute greater agency

    (I think you, like most victims of 20th C pseudoscience attribute greater agency to our intentions, and stated intent over external consequence. Conspiracies of common cognitive bias, common interest are endemic even if common intent isn’t – outside of those with such agency.)


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-16 14:19:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173602305050124288

    Reply addressees: @GrkStav @karlbykarlsmith

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173583317918085125


    IN REPLY TO:

    @GrkStav

    @curtdoolittle @karlbykarlsmith The “destruction of the family” as a *policy* goal?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173583317918085125

  • Don’t know how much farther you’ve taken it but other than what’s stated above,

    Don’t know how much farther you’ve taken it but other than what’s stated above, certainly the right direction. Kind of would like to see the reverse presentation from biological ability to signs, and cultural differences in signs, particularly those of power, authority since …


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-16 06:45:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173487991337209858

    Reply addressees: @Semiogogue

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173487098973868032


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @Semiogogue 21) Yes, you are referencing O’keefe etc. border, location, place, hex, spaces. Ok. 22) all memory fragments are stored where they care calculated (disambiguated). 23) better to back restate past rather than try to fit present into it. 24) Yes, but it’s ACTION in space.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1173487098973868032


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @Semiogogue 21) Yes, you are referencing O’keefe etc. border, location, place, hex, spaces. Ok. 22) all memory fragments are stored where they care calculated (disambiguated). 23) better to back restate past rather than try to fit present into it. 24) Yes, but it’s ACTION in space.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1173487098973868032

  • Glad I stuck with it. Yes you are on the right track. Too close to postmodernism

    Glad I stuck with it. Yes you are on the right track. Too close to postmodernism, and that’s where I kept thinking you would go. Last point is that yes, we model the world as actionable objects, spaces, boundaries and locations at our body’s scale (a triangle in a hexagon).


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-16 06:43:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173487516416118784

    Reply addressees: @Semiogogue

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173486004512145410


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @Semiogogue 19) Yes, so better to leave behind the philosophy (pseudoscience) and just work within the scientific paradigm that universally converges on one paradigm. 20) very easy to convert this speech into scientific speech and the underlying neurology.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1173486004512145410


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @Semiogogue 19) Yes, so better to leave behind the philosophy (pseudoscience) and just work within the scientific paradigm that universally converges on one paradigm. 20) very easy to convert this speech into scientific speech and the underlying neurology.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1173486004512145410