Curt Doolittle

Theme: Agency

  • Consequences of Lower Verbal Ability (Crime)

    LOWER VERBAL ABILITY AND THE CONSEQUENCES by Liam Eddy Lower verbal ability is due to the structure of the brain. The recognition of feeling occurs in the left hemisphere while the ability to speak is governed in the right. When there is a little cross over between the hemispheres alexithymia is common.

    Common in the people who demonstrate alexithymia are executive function defects. What happens when a person who cannot label their emotions, with little executive function (Impulse control etc), is in a public environment? Opportunity leads to crime. Frustration leads to aggression. —- ALEXITHYMIA: the inability to identify and describe one’s emotions. Dysfunction in emotional awareness, social attachment, and interpersonal relations.

  • CRIME REDUCTION IN AUSTRALIA by Liam Eddy One of the reasons crime is dropping i

    CRIME REDUCTION IN AUSTRALIA

    by Liam Eddy

    One of the reasons crime is dropping in Australia is;

    A – The male brain develops genuine executive function at about 25. People are in school longer and out partying less.

    B – Marriage rates are increasing, the most important aspect of an offenders life is whether they form a meaningful and lasting marriage. Marrying a woman decreases criminal activity to nearly nothing.

    C – people in the younger generation are drinking less. Crime rates spike in summer because people are hot, crowded and mingling.

    Interestingly people with ADHD are now understood to be the previously largely unexplained portion of recidivists. They are not ‘bad’ people, they just have severe impulse control, emotional recognition and may lack emotional regulation. When raised in a poorly controlled environment and/or trained (intentionally or unintentionally) they begin offending.

    Realise that while IQ is very important, a huge number (85% in some cases) of prisoners are drug addicts. Most of them were achol and other drug (AOD) children. The effects are terrible, but they may produce offspring of great quality.

    Very soon we will be imaging and understanding the brain in ways never thought possible.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-27 10:20:00 UTC

  • LOWER VERBAL ABILITY AND THE CONSEQUENCES by Liam Eddy Lower verbal ability is d

    LOWER VERBAL ABILITY AND THE CONSEQUENCES

    by Liam Eddy

    Lower verbal ability is due to the structure of the brain. The recognition of feeling occurs in the left hemisphere while the ability to speak is governed in the right. When there is a little cross over between the hemispheres alexithymia is common.

    Common in the people who demonstrate alexithymia are executive function defects.

    What happens when a person who cannot label their emotions, with little executive function (Impulse control etc), is in a public environment?

    Opportunity leads to crime.

    Frustration leads to aggression.

    —-

    ALEXITHYMIA: the inability to identify and describe one’s emotions. Dysfunction in emotional awareness, social attachment, and interpersonal relations.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-27 09:39:00 UTC

  • YES, STUPID PEOPLE CREATE MORE CRIME People commit crimes across the spectrum. S

    YES, STUPID PEOPLE CREATE MORE CRIME

    People commit crimes across the spectrum.

    State and Local IQ corresponds to crime rates.

    Stupid people get caught more often.

    Stupid people tend to pursue low risk low reward crimes. (those requiring little planning and high opportunism)

    When it comes to murder a surprisingly high percentage of murderers are caught.

    I use the term evil 80’s but the average criminal has an IQ of 93, which only serves to confirm my position that while the median of the distribution is 100, the medium of the distribution needs to be above 106, and closer to 110, leaving a full standard deviation between the median and the border of criminality 95 to preserve a high trust society.

    But in general the evil 80’s (probably up to 95) demographic (a) is universally outcast, (b) undesirable even to each other, (c) cannot trust information, particularly from each other, (d) personalizes it to ‘oppression’ rather than “avoidance”, (e) justifies his behavior as retaliation for that treatment (f) is still smart enough to profit from immorality if not smart enough to profit from morality. (g) this includes the ability to practice all forms of criminal behavior and develop skill at avoiding being caught.

    Not surprisingly (which is worth noting) criminals consistently measure with lower verbal ability. Hence my arguments that I’m not sure that the primary evolution out of africa is almost entirely verbal.

    —“Lower verbal ability is due to the structure of the brain. The recognition of feeling occurs in the left hemisphere while the ability to speak is governed in the right. When there is a little cross over between the hemispheres alexithymia is common. Common in the people who demonstrate alexithymia are executive function defects.”— Liam Eddy

    So just as you see greater verbal ability in ashkenazi, greater spatial in east asians, a balance in whites, you see deficiencies in every other group. But out of these deficiencies, (a) personality defects (b) cultural reinforcement of those defects, and (c) lower verbal IQ – exaggerate the problem.

    Worse, the ‘multiplier’ is aggression. Meaning that the higher the aggression in the personality the more expressed is the criminality of low IQ. Again, this is why I’m a critic of adding peoples who have not undergone the manorial transformation (filter) to the european gene pool, and social and political orders. They bring with them permanently defective genes.

    We forget that the primary difference between whites and ashkenazi of same ability is aggression, and that this aggression is as much or more responsible for their ability to carry intellectual workloads as well as make use of their intelligence competitively.

    African americans are highly pro social (extroverted), but very negatively distributed, and even in that distribution they are negatively biased in verbal ability, AND they mature much earlier, faster, and deeper.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-27 07:25:00 UTC

  • Feelings and Group Strategies

    THE CIRCULAR ARGUMENT OF HOW PEOPLE THINK AND FEEL, OR THE SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENT OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT PEOPLE THINK AND FEEL? 1) while I must understand how people came to their group strategies (habitual, normative, traditional, intellectual, institutional, and technological), I must also understand the outcomes (externalities) produced by those strategies. 2) if the world dislikes you and your people and their behaviors and their externalities, they must have a reason for it. 3) So the question is, if you and your people have failed in every social, economic, political, and technological, possible dimension except malthusian reproduction, and the world dislikes you, do they have a reason to? 4) People invent excuses for employing their group strategies. Otherwise those strategies would cause mental and emotional labor, and openness to failure of that strategy. We all just negotiate on behalf of our personal, gender, class, and group strategies. 5) Our feelings then are mere reflections of success with or failure of our actions in correspondence with our justifications(habits). So the excuses (justifications) we use are a measure only of correspondence with our strategies, but that tells us nothing about the good/bad, morality/immorality of our actions and our strategies. Or more simply put, our emotions are reflections of the competitiveness of our strategies. 6) So as westerners we tend to consider the individual and his emotions, yet his emotions are just a reflection of the success or failure of his strategies. As such, what are those strategies and are they good/moral/constructive, or bad/immoral/destructive? 7) War and Genocide have an illustriously successful history. And islam and judaism have been more destructive than all other forces combined other than the great plagues and diseases. You have to get to the black plague even if not malaria before you’ve killed enough people to match the death, destruction, and dark ages created by islam, judaism(communism), and christianity(anti-aristocracy). Communism has been murderous under the pretense of ‘good’, and Islam has been nearly ten times as murderous under the pretense of ‘good’. Christianity was spread as a means of undermining the western empire from within by the syrians and byzantines, and ‘old europeans’. Islam was spread by force, and resulted in the destruction of the great civilizations: egypt, north african, levantine, mesopotamian, persian, roman, and eventually byzantine. 8) Despite its beginnings in the 600’s, islam had conquered and exhausted the assets of the great civilizations of the ancient world by 1200, and declined rapidly thereafter, brought only into survival by the migration of the turks and their adoption of islam. 9) At present we are fighting judaism(communism, libertarianism, neo-conservatism), postmodernism(French catholicism), and islamic fundamentalism, all of which originate with rabbinical judaism. (Christianity is a Jewish heresy and Islam a Christian heresy). So by the logic of caring ‘what people feel or think’ instead of “what is the result of what people feel and think” we should allow our civilization to be overrun as were all other great civilizations, and leave only the chinese, japanese, and koreans holding back the tide of dysgenia, ignorance and violence? Islam has been at war with the west for 1400 years and if you do nothing more than review an animated history of islamic raids and conquests in europe and the number of deaths they perpetrated, and the change in standard of living under those conquests, and the absolute destruction of all knowledge after 1200, then our conquest of the americas pales by comparison – if for no other reason than we used the wealth generated by it to drag humanity kicking and screaming out of the ignorance produced by judaism, christianity, and islam. We were able to resist islam only because of our advanced technology, and because the turkish empire had exhausted itself under islam as well – and could not develop a european network under rule of law, or an asian network under rule of professional bureaucracy, or an indian network under rule by cast and religion. Instead, islam created iteratively dysgenic ignorance and tribalism. Islam, south america, india and africa, all have the same problems: by adopting political systems favoring the increase in the size of the underclass, those underclasses are such a heavy burden that they cannot participate in the modern world economy. If we stack countries by IQ we find their economic performance. If we stack people by economic, and social class, we find IQ, personality, and physical attractiveness largely rise and fall in concert, with the upper middle class the peak, and the upper class consisting of random outliers. Cheers

  • Feelings and Group Strategies

    THE CIRCULAR ARGUMENT OF HOW PEOPLE THINK AND FEEL, OR THE SCIENTIFIC ARGUMENT OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT PEOPLE THINK AND FEEL? 1) while I must understand how people came to their group strategies (habitual, normative, traditional, intellectual, institutional, and technological), I must also understand the outcomes (externalities) produced by those strategies. 2) if the world dislikes you and your people and their behaviors and their externalities, they must have a reason for it. 3) So the question is, if you and your people have failed in every social, economic, political, and technological, possible dimension except malthusian reproduction, and the world dislikes you, do they have a reason to? 4) People invent excuses for employing their group strategies. Otherwise those strategies would cause mental and emotional labor, and openness to failure of that strategy. We all just negotiate on behalf of our personal, gender, class, and group strategies. 5) Our feelings then are mere reflections of success with or failure of our actions in correspondence with our justifications(habits). So the excuses (justifications) we use are a measure only of correspondence with our strategies, but that tells us nothing about the good/bad, morality/immorality of our actions and our strategies. Or more simply put, our emotions are reflections of the competitiveness of our strategies. 6) So as westerners we tend to consider the individual and his emotions, yet his emotions are just a reflection of the success or failure of his strategies. As such, what are those strategies and are they good/moral/constructive, or bad/immoral/destructive? 7) War and Genocide have an illustriously successful history. And islam and judaism have been more destructive than all other forces combined other than the great plagues and diseases. You have to get to the black plague even if not malaria before you’ve killed enough people to match the death, destruction, and dark ages created by islam, judaism(communism), and christianity(anti-aristocracy). Communism has been murderous under the pretense of ‘good’, and Islam has been nearly ten times as murderous under the pretense of ‘good’. Christianity was spread as a means of undermining the western empire from within by the syrians and byzantines, and ‘old europeans’. Islam was spread by force, and resulted in the destruction of the great civilizations: egypt, north african, levantine, mesopotamian, persian, roman, and eventually byzantine. 8) Despite its beginnings in the 600’s, islam had conquered and exhausted the assets of the great civilizations of the ancient world by 1200, and declined rapidly thereafter, brought only into survival by the migration of the turks and their adoption of islam. 9) At present we are fighting judaism(communism, libertarianism, neo-conservatism), postmodernism(French catholicism), and islamic fundamentalism, all of which originate with rabbinical judaism. (Christianity is a Jewish heresy and Islam a Christian heresy). So by the logic of caring ‘what people feel or think’ instead of “what is the result of what people feel and think” we should allow our civilization to be overrun as were all other great civilizations, and leave only the chinese, japanese, and koreans holding back the tide of dysgenia, ignorance and violence? Islam has been at war with the west for 1400 years and if you do nothing more than review an animated history of islamic raids and conquests in europe and the number of deaths they perpetrated, and the change in standard of living under those conquests, and the absolute destruction of all knowledge after 1200, then our conquest of the americas pales by comparison – if for no other reason than we used the wealth generated by it to drag humanity kicking and screaming out of the ignorance produced by judaism, christianity, and islam. We were able to resist islam only because of our advanced technology, and because the turkish empire had exhausted itself under islam as well – and could not develop a european network under rule of law, or an asian network under rule of professional bureaucracy, or an indian network under rule by cast and religion. Instead, islam created iteratively dysgenic ignorance and tribalism. Islam, south america, india and africa, all have the same problems: by adopting political systems favoring the increase in the size of the underclass, those underclasses are such a heavy burden that they cannot participate in the modern world economy. If we stack countries by IQ we find their economic performance. If we stack people by economic, and social class, we find IQ, personality, and physical attractiveness largely rise and fall in concert, with the upper middle class the peak, and the upper class consisting of random outliers. Cheers

  • Do Smart People Lack Common Sense (Intelligence)

    –“DO SMART PEOPLE LACK COMMON SENSE?”– Well, there are a couple of issues here we can discuss. 1) IQ increases the rate at which you learn, and the degrees of indirection between what’s learned. 2) IQ is the most dominant personality trait, with industriousness second, and all others comparatively far less influential. 3) By and large, after the age of 22, we effectively sort by IQ. Or at least every 1/2 standard deviation (7 points). And it applies (generally) to all walks of life. 4) People with average IQ’s tend to collect information from peers. People with high IQ’s rely less on the opinions of others. 5) So average people network more and pursue less risky, or novel (innovative) ends, and smarter people do the opposite. 6) This is why science has been so important because as we have learned science and reduce errors, the ‘habits’ of scientific thought have been adopted by mainstream people and they ‘calculate’ together fairly successfully. 7) My point of view, is that together we create a sufficiently homogenous set of habits that we believe we understand far more than we do – (overconfidence) – when all we are doing is habituating norms that survived evolution and markets. 8) Roughly speaking, 140 innovates, 130 explains 120’s apply, 110’s organize, 100’s do, 90’s follow, 80s do the best they can and are generally angry about it, and 70s stumble through life despite the fact that no matter what they do it seems not to work. That’s an exaggeration, but it’s close enough that it serves as a general rule of understanding. We are just as specialized as ants, but the similarity of emotion, want, and language convinces us that we are more similar than we are. Hence why we generally choose every aspect of our lives so that we function with people within six degrees of separation.

  • Do Smart People Lack Common Sense (Intelligence)

    –“DO SMART PEOPLE LACK COMMON SENSE?”– Well, there are a couple of issues here we can discuss. 1) IQ increases the rate at which you learn, and the degrees of indirection between what’s learned. 2) IQ is the most dominant personality trait, with industriousness second, and all others comparatively far less influential. 3) By and large, after the age of 22, we effectively sort by IQ. Or at least every 1/2 standard deviation (7 points). And it applies (generally) to all walks of life. 4) People with average IQ’s tend to collect information from peers. People with high IQ’s rely less on the opinions of others. 5) So average people network more and pursue less risky, or novel (innovative) ends, and smarter people do the opposite. 6) This is why science has been so important because as we have learned science and reduce errors, the ‘habits’ of scientific thought have been adopted by mainstream people and they ‘calculate’ together fairly successfully. 7) My point of view, is that together we create a sufficiently homogenous set of habits that we believe we understand far more than we do – (overconfidence) – when all we are doing is habituating norms that survived evolution and markets. 8) Roughly speaking, 140 innovates, 130 explains 120’s apply, 110’s organize, 100’s do, 90’s follow, 80s do the best they can and are generally angry about it, and 70s stumble through life despite the fact that no matter what they do it seems not to work. That’s an exaggeration, but it’s close enough that it serves as a general rule of understanding. We are just as specialized as ants, but the similarity of emotion, want, and language convinces us that we are more similar than we are. Hence why we generally choose every aspect of our lives so that we function with people within six degrees of separation.

  • It’s not that americans are necessarily dumber than europeans, but that they’re

    It’s not that americans are necessarily dumber than europeans, but that they’re worse educated, indisciplined, overconfident, and overzealous.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-26 17:07:00 UTC

  • “DO SMART PEOPLE LACK COMMON SENSE?”– Well, there are a couple of issues here w

    –“DO SMART PEOPLE LACK COMMON SENSE?”–

    Well, there are a couple of issues here we can discuss.

    1) IQ increases the rate at which you learn, and the degrees of indirection between what’s learned.

    2) IQ is the most dominant personality trait, with industriousness second, and all others comparatively far less influential.

    3) By and large, after the age of 22, we effectively sort by IQ. Or at least every 1/2 standard deviation (7 points). And it applies (generally) to all walks of life.

    4) People with average IQ’s tend to collect information from peers. People with high IQ’s rely less on the opinions of others.

    5) So average people network more and pursue less risky, or novel (innovative) ends, and smarter people do the opposite.

    6) This is why science has been so important because as we have learned science and reduce errors, the ‘habits’ of scientific thought have been adopted by mainstream people and they ‘calculate’ together fairly successfully.

    7) My point of view, is that together we create a sufficiently homogenous set of habits that we believe we understand far more than we do – (overconfidence) – when all we are doing is habituating norms that survived evolution and markets.

    8) Roughly speaking, 140 innovates, 130 explains 120’s apply, 110’s organize, 100’s do, 90’s follow, 80s do the best they can and are generally angry about it, and 70s stumble through life despite the fact that no matter what they do it seems not to work. That’s an exaggeration, but it’s close enough that it serves as a general rule of understanding. We are just as specialized as ants, but the similarity of emotion, want, and language convinces us that we are more similar than we are.

    Hence why we generally choose every aspect of our lives so that we function with people within six degrees of separation.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-04-26 15:10:00 UTC