Curt Doolittle

Theme: Agency

  • Is It Racist To Not Want To Date A White Man? I Am Half White Half Native, And I Really Don’t Experience Attraction To White Men.

    No. Follow your genes. The are more likely acting in your interest than your intellect. For the simple reason that they can’t be persuaded by propaganda.

    https://www.quora.com/Is-it-racist-to-not-want-to-date-a-white-man-I-am-half-white-half-native-and-I-really-don-t-experience-attraction-to-white-men

  • Is It Racist To Not Want To Date A White Man? I Am Half White Half Native, And I Really Don’t Experience Attraction To White Men.

    No. Follow your genes. The are more likely acting in your interest than your intellect. For the simple reason that they can’t be persuaded by propaganda.

    https://www.quora.com/Is-it-racist-to-not-want-to-date-a-white-man-I-am-half-white-half-native-and-I-really-don-t-experience-attraction-to-white-men

  • (read this) by Bill Joslin Ideological and religious frames reduce the intellect

    (read this) by Bill Joslin Ideological and religious frames reduce the intellectual cost of framing the world. Consequence (accountability) forces higher investment out of interpretive, justificationary, of explanatory frames into operational frames. The later reorder the contingencies properly, meaning utility proceeds or grounds aesthetics (a trade elevating to a craft elevating again to an art – the progression of mastery) opposed to floating aesthetics (borrowing from rands floating concepts) which can be pleasant and inspiring but devoid of any substantive value. The initial critism attempt to invert that relationship , isolating aesthetics from more fundemental forms of value and then assert it’s function as what drives reasoning. In this later case the only value aesthics obtains remains as a means to acquire power through motivation (inspiration) of others. Then claims this outcome as the causal agent. We must value first in order to reason (valuation drives motivation) and therefore reason is contingent on aesthetics – aesthetics drives human action… Yet I fail to see the tiler, convenience store owner or floor sweeper to be driven by aesthetics. But find the carpenter, mason, and machinist elevate their skills to obtain aesthetics quality. And what drives their progression to mastery is the combination of the grammar, logic, rhetoric and ethics (desire for pride in work, desire for good standing and reputation) which leads to the aesthetic.

  • (read this) by Bill Joslin Ideological and religious frames reduce the intellect

    (read this) by Bill Joslin Ideological and religious frames reduce the intellectual cost of framing the world. Consequence (accountability) forces higher investment out of interpretive, justificationary, of explanatory frames into operational frames. The later reorder the contingencies properly, meaning utility proceeds or grounds aesthetics (a trade elevating to a craft elevating again to an art – the progression of mastery) opposed to floating aesthetics (borrowing from rands floating concepts) which can be pleasant and inspiring but devoid of any substantive value. The initial critism attempt to invert that relationship , isolating aesthetics from more fundemental forms of value and then assert it’s function as what drives reasoning. In this later case the only value aesthics obtains remains as a means to acquire power through motivation (inspiration) of others. Then claims this outcome as the causal agent. We must value first in order to reason (valuation drives motivation) and therefore reason is contingent on aesthetics – aesthetics drives human action… Yet I fail to see the tiler, convenience store owner or floor sweeper to be driven by aesthetics. But find the carpenter, mason, and machinist elevate their skills to obtain aesthetics quality. And what drives their progression to mastery is the combination of the grammar, logic, rhetoric and ethics (desire for pride in work, desire for good standing and reputation) which leads to the aesthetic.

  • (read this) by Bill Joslin Ideological and religious frames reduce the intellect

    (read this)

    by Bill Joslin

    Ideological and religious frames reduce the intellectual cost of framing the world. Consequence (accountability) forces higher investment out of interpretive, justificationary, of explanatory frames into operational frames.

    The later reorder the contingencies properly, meaning utility proceeds or grounds aesthetics (a trade elevating to a craft elevating again to an art – the progression of mastery) opposed to floating aesthetics (borrowing from rands floating concepts) which can be pleasant and inspiring but devoid of any substantive value.

    The initial critism attempt to invert that relationship , isolating aesthetics from more fundemental forms of value and then assert it’s function as what drives reasoning.

    In this later case the only value aesthics obtains remains as a means to acquire power through motivation (inspiration) of others. Then claims this outcome as the causal agent.

    We must value first in order to reason (valuation drives motivation) and therefore reason is contingent on aesthetics – aesthetics drives human action…

    Yet I fail to see the tiler, convenience store owner or floor sweeper to be driven by aesthetics. But find the carpenter, mason, and machinist elevate their skills to obtain aesthetics quality.

    And what drives their progression to mastery is the combination of the grammar, logic, rhetoric and ethics (desire for pride in work, desire for good standing and reputation) which leads to the aesthetic.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-01 22:24:00 UTC

  • by Bill Joslin Change or influence a person’s aesthetic and their valuation will

    by Bill Joslin Change or influence a person’s aesthetic and their valuation will shift (their ethics). And conversely, clarifying one’s valuation will shift his aesthetics. I say this because as far as I can see, what is considered by many as the downside of reason – i.e. emotion, intuition, bias, – are really “fast-thinking” (stimulus response-reactive) processes which operate concurrent to “slow-thinking” (reason, logic, analysis) processes. And these influence each other (i.e. bias confirmation etc)…. but that also means the “fast-thinking processes” (our intuition) can be trained just like our reason. As slow-thinking clarifies and de-contextualizes common operations; fast thinking processes update in response. As you see the detriment of (anything really) – but, say emotional or moral reasoning – your preference for operational reasoning increases. And as one pursues operational reasoning, the fast-thinking process adapts – and we “feel” (disgust, tensions, suspicion whatever) when confronted with moral or emotional reasoning. Our biases and intuitions have “updated” – and the reverse is also true: our new biases and intuitions assist our ongoing reason. Since I’ve begun “training my mind” (really looking at, and attempting to, understand topics like philosophy etc) – I can no longer (no exaggeration) tolerate American TV and 99% of popular music. Specifically – as the time-horizon of my valuations increased, the foundation of those valuations changed, as those valuations changed, my tastes changed. -Bill Joslin

  • by Bill Joslin Change or influence a person’s aesthetic and their valuation will

    by Bill Joslin

    Change or influence a person’s aesthetic and their valuation will shift (their ethics). And conversely, clarifying one’s valuation will shift his aesthetics.

    I say this because as far as I can see, what is considered by many as the downside of reason – i.e. emotion, intuition, bias, – are really “fast-thinking” (stimulus response-reactive) processes which operate concurrent to “slow-thinking” (reason, logic, analysis) processes. And these influence each other (i.e. bias confirmation etc)…. but that also means the “fast-thinking processes” (our intuition) can be trained just like our reason.

    As slow-thinking clarifies and de-contextualizes common operations; fast thinking processes update in response. As you see the detriment of (anything really) – but, say emotional or moral reasoning – your preference for operational reasoning increases.

    And as one pursues operational reasoning, the fast-thinking process adapts – and we “feel” (disgust, tensions, suspicion whatever) when confronted with moral or emotional reasoning. Our biases and intuitions have “updated” – and the reverse is also true: our new biases and intuitions assist our ongoing reason.

    Since I’ve begun “training my mind” (really looking at, and attempting to, understand topics like philosophy etc) – I can no longer (no exaggeration) tolerate American TV and 99% of popular music.

    Specifically – as the time-horizon of my valuations increased, the foundation of those valuations changed, as those valuations changed, my tastes changed.

    -Bill Joslin

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-01 22:23:00 UTC

  • by Bill Joslin Change or influence a person’s aesthetic and their valuation will

    by Bill Joslin Change or influence a person’s aesthetic and their valuation will shift (their ethics). And conversely, clarifying one’s valuation will shift his aesthetics. I say this because as far as I can see, what is considered by many as the downside of reason – i.e. emotion, intuition, bias, – are really “fast-thinking” (stimulus response-reactive) processes which operate concurrent to “slow-thinking” (reason, logic, analysis) processes. And these influence each other (i.e. bias confirmation etc)…. but that also means the “fast-thinking processes” (our intuition) can be trained just like our reason. As slow-thinking clarifies and de-contextualizes common operations; fast thinking processes update in response. As you see the detriment of (anything really) – but, say emotional or moral reasoning – your preference for operational reasoning increases. And as one pursues operational reasoning, the fast-thinking process adapts – and we “feel” (disgust, tensions, suspicion whatever) when confronted with moral or emotional reasoning. Our biases and intuitions have “updated” – and the reverse is also true: our new biases and intuitions assist our ongoing reason. Since I’ve begun “training my mind” (really looking at, and attempting to, understand topics like philosophy etc) – I can no longer (no exaggeration) tolerate American TV and 99% of popular music. Specifically – as the time-horizon of my valuations increased, the foundation of those valuations changed, as those valuations changed, my tastes changed. -Bill Joslin

  • 2 – … (c) the kind of people who respond to polls have time to do so which is

    2 – … (c) the kind of people who respond to polls have time to do so which is a charitable way of saying people who have agency don’t waste their time. …

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-01 13:33:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/959056994983448578

    Reply addressees: @Adsthoughts @pelosimedia @sapinker @chronicle

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/958966002452119552

    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/958966002452119552

  • Just Use The Word: Infantilization

    I really don’t understand why we don’t just state the obvious, that the female mind of reproductive necessity biases heavily to that which she can control: infatilism. And this is why women take such great fascination with babies, and prefer their children are born with properties that make them pliable and their ‘friends’ rather successful competitors. Because women must be strong and possess agency to raise those who are strong and with agency. And women who are weak an lack agency wish children who they can control despite their weakness and agency. Abrahamism, Marxism, Feminism, Postmodernism: they advocate infantilism. Because their followers have infantile minds. And I suspect that like everything else, that’s because in 80% of cases they have infantile brains. And that during the great transformation, buddha came close, but only Epicurious, Zeno and Aristotle got it right. Meaning, living in correspondence with reality without submitting to it, by making the mind as strong as the body, ether by Achilles/Alexander(aristocracy), Zeno/Aurelius (Middle class), or Epicurious (Working Class), but never by abandoning reality to a fictionalism (underclass). These are adulthoods. Agency. Whether for the powerful, the influential (middle class), or the valuable (Working Class). And just as we can train people in reading, writing, math, accounting, and physics – we can train people in stoicism, epicureanism, and heroism. But that is counter to the infantile: because all of them require agency, and the infantile is still an undomesticated animal, neither genetically able, nor sufficiently trained, to be included in that label of sentience and agency we call ‘Human’. The infantile, is equal to, the animal.