Curt Doolittle

Theme: Agency

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. MALES REQUIRE DOMINANCE PLAY (GAMES) TO INVES

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    MALES REQUIRE DOMINANCE PLAY (GAMES) TO INVEST IN LEARNING
    Let me help you. Males learn via dominance play (competition). I teach the ‘male way’ through providing vehicles for dominance play by means of articulate argument. I stomp on other means of dominance play as unconstructive in this venue. But if you taught boys through dominance play they would be interested in education. The reason boys check out of society is that they have to resort to video games for their dominance play. Anything that can be taught in a video game will work.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-30 13:44:48 UTC

  • How Do We Evolve (genetically) and Why?

    (groups and genetics) 1 – We can evolve (a) through normal mutation (b) through selection by intergenerational expression (c) class (quality) sortition, rates of reproduction, and rotation, (d) through selection by group strategy and reorganization resulting in asymmetric rates, , (e) through technological innovation. Although “d” is misunderstood. 2 – Of these five methods of evolution it appears c,d,e are faster and more influential than a,b. And that in general we are selecting between low dimorphism and increased rates of maturity (male) in hotter climates, higher populations, and greater disease gradients, versus higher dimorphism and decrease rates of maturity (female) in cooler climates, lower populations, and weaker disease gradients. 3 – The primary axis of difference between the races and sub races, if not tribes, consists in (a) the distribution of dimorphism (balance of male and female traits between the genders), (b) degree of neoteny (balance of rates of maturity or delayed maturity), and (c) success at culling the underclasses (defectives). 4 – We do not face this reality yet in the postwar era due to (((suppression))) of scientific truths, but some races and sub races are more evolved than others and we can test this because rates of maturity (neoteny), degrees of dimorphism (cognitive structure, and endocrine responses), and IQ distribution (degree of suppression of the underclasses). In this sense races and sub races are vastly unequal. 5 – But this only means that in large part some groups express different excellences in their middle, upper middle and upper classes, and that some groups have been more successful at culling the lower classes due to climate and available means of production. 6 – In other words, we can continue to speciate by our various group excellences if and only if homogenous nation states that practice economic eugenics (reproductive limitations).

  • How Do We Evolve (genetically) and Why?

    (groups and genetics) 1 – We can evolve (a) through normal mutation (b) through selection by intergenerational expression (c) class (quality) sortition, rates of reproduction, and rotation, (d) through selection by group strategy and reorganization resulting in asymmetric rates, , (e) through technological innovation. Although “d” is misunderstood. 2 – Of these five methods of evolution it appears c,d,e are faster and more influential than a,b. And that in general we are selecting between low dimorphism and increased rates of maturity (male) in hotter climates, higher populations, and greater disease gradients, versus higher dimorphism and decrease rates of maturity (female) in cooler climates, lower populations, and weaker disease gradients. 3 – The primary axis of difference between the races and sub races, if not tribes, consists in (a) the distribution of dimorphism (balance of male and female traits between the genders), (b) degree of neoteny (balance of rates of maturity or delayed maturity), and (c) success at culling the underclasses (defectives). 4 – We do not face this reality yet in the postwar era due to (((suppression))) of scientific truths, but some races and sub races are more evolved than others and we can test this because rates of maturity (neoteny), degrees of dimorphism (cognitive structure, and endocrine responses), and IQ distribution (degree of suppression of the underclasses). In this sense races and sub races are vastly unequal. 5 – But this only means that in large part some groups express different excellences in their middle, upper middle and upper classes, and that some groups have been more successful at culling the lower classes due to climate and available means of production. 6 – In other words, we can continue to speciate by our various group excellences if and only if homogenous nation states that practice economic eugenics (reproductive limitations).

  • Religiosity and Computational Discounting

    (the economics of spirituality) I think where I stand today, is that I have almost fully converted to where i see the computational needs of the brain and the need to acquire certain resources (of all kinds), as causing emotional responses and wants. So when I study world religions it’s this computational savings I look for, and I try to understand what computational discount they’re ‘buying’ with it and what their ‘paying for it’ with external consequences of a large number of people doing so. So I don’t any longer hold (believe) that we are trying to serve emotions, but that emotions inform us as to the demands of our computational necessities. And so this allows me to extract my intuitions from the process of religions, because those religions were developed to ‘fool’ those intuitions by cheap means of training. So just as using propertarian language has helped me disassemble social science, and acquisitionism has helped me disassemble psychology, computational demands have helped me disassemble what we call spirituality. The ceremony of religion is just satisfying our need for computational discounts by running with the pack for a while, in some kind of ritual. The dogma of religion is discounting our reason. The homogeneity of religious provides discounting on cooperation. To some degree these computational efficiencies serve the same purpose as do money and prices: they create discounts from the production of commensurability, and incentive to pursue it.

  • Religiosity and Computational Discounting

    (the economics of spirituality) I think where I stand today, is that I have almost fully converted to where i see the computational needs of the brain and the need to acquire certain resources (of all kinds), as causing emotional responses and wants. So when I study world religions it’s this computational savings I look for, and I try to understand what computational discount they’re ‘buying’ with it and what their ‘paying for it’ with external consequences of a large number of people doing so. So I don’t any longer hold (believe) that we are trying to serve emotions, but that emotions inform us as to the demands of our computational necessities. And so this allows me to extract my intuitions from the process of religions, because those religions were developed to ‘fool’ those intuitions by cheap means of training. So just as using propertarian language has helped me disassemble social science, and acquisitionism has helped me disassemble psychology, computational demands have helped me disassemble what we call spirituality. The ceremony of religion is just satisfying our need for computational discounts by running with the pack for a while, in some kind of ritual. The dogma of religion is discounting our reason. The homogeneity of religious provides discounting on cooperation. To some degree these computational efficiencies serve the same purpose as do money and prices: they create discounts from the production of commensurability, and incentive to pursue it.

  • “Your life is yours to give, not to take.”—Dan Warren

    —“Your life is yours to give, not to take.”—Dan Warren

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 11:56:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1023537791706308613

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. —“Your life is yours to give, not to take.”

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    —“Your life is yours to give, not to take.”—Dan Warren

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 11:56:32 UTC

  • “Your life is yours to give, not to take.”—Dan Warren

    —“Your life is yours to give, not to take.”—Dan Warren

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-29 07:56:00 UTC

  • “Suicide is never honorable. It kills an ally without taking out any enemies in

    —“Suicide is never honorable. It kills an ally without taking out any enemies in the process.”— Steve Pender

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-28 23:29:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1023349764987998210

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. —“Suicide is never honorable. It kills an a

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    —“Suicide is never honorable. It kills an ally without taking out any enemies in the process.”— Steve Pender

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-28 23:29:19 UTC