Curt Doolittle

Theme: Agency

  • PETERSON’S INSIGHT IS THE CORRELATION BETWEEN BRAIN STRUCTURE AND CHEMISTRY, THE

    PETERSON’S INSIGHT IS THE CORRELATION BETWEEN BRAIN STRUCTURE AND CHEMISTRY, THE MONOMYTH, AND THE MYTHS

    Peterson does a number of less than perfect things. But (a) he is restoring stoicism (self authoring), (b) he is restoring myth as wisdom literature using the universal Monomyth>Archetypes>Plots>Virtues system, (c) he is illustrating that this set of teaching virtues by myth maps to personality traits, and how those traits map to brain chemistry and structures.

    WHAT DOES “GETTING IT RIGHT” MEAN TO PETERSON? CORRESPONDENCE AND COHERENCE.

    Peterson uses the term “got it right” when picking insights from different thinkers, and he lauds those with deep insight and literary talent in expression of them. But when he says “got it right” he is referring to an insight that mirrors both the findings cognitive science and the expression of that cognitive science in the

    Furthermore the authority on the subject is Hicks. And It’s flawless. Which I’m happy to argue with anyone. From a purely technical standpoint, the argumentative structure originates in France as moral literature. Is reformed by Kant into rationalism and then the German Continental line. Is reformed by Marx (boaz, freud, cantor, lenin, trotsky, mises, rothbard, strauss) into pseudoscience. And was reformed by the french again into moral literature(Derrida,Foucault), then into pseudo-rationalism (philosophy without truth, Rorty etc.). But the technique has been the same whether in judaism, christianity, islam, marxism, feminism, postmodernism: Literary, pseudo-scientific, pseudo-rational.

    But never deflationary truth: What we call “Science”.

    While we did develop Darwin, Menger, Weber, Durkheim, Pareto, Poincare, Hilbert, Maxwell, Einstein, Spencer, and Nietzsche, and Hayek. Despite mises, brouwer in math and bridgman in physics, and various thinkers in Law, the Operational(Intuitionistic) revolution failed except in the physical sciences. We failed to continue the enlightenment into the social sciences and prevent the counter-enlightenemnts of the abrahamists (fundamentalists, marxists, feminists, postmodernists).

    We were not able to solve social science without cognitive science, genetics, the failures of the postwar attempt at spreading democracy, the failure of communism, socialism, and the great society programs. And the failure of social democracy in those civilizations without accumulated genetic (higher Iq) and cultural (high trust) assets.

    TESTING PETERSON AND HICKS

    My analytic technique requires that we examine the method of argument – whether it is stated via deflation, conflation, or fictionalism, whether it’s scientifically true or not, and then I determine the changes that occur in the state of all existentially possible forms of capital, and whether those changes were voluntary or not.

    So I circumvent ‘meaning’ entirely. In other words, I perform an accounting audit of the arguments. And his arguments hold. Sorry. Rock solid.

    PETERSON’S ONE TROUBLING TOLERANCE

    I would like to correct Peterson on simply one point: that our deception by marxism and postmodernism it is precisely abrahamic use of supernatural literature as in Judaism, christianity, and islam) to deceive and manufacture impediments to knowledge by method of conflation, overloading, suggestion, and ‘fictionalism’ (confusing the real and the ideal and the supernatural). And providing a means of producing an addiction response through ritual and prayer. All off which appear to cause catastrophic harm to all civilizations that adopt abrahamic deception by suggestion and addiction.

    So, by tolerating abrahamic myths – any myths reliant upon fictionalism (conflation of supernatural, ideal, real; myth and history, wisdom and law) – Peterson is leaving open the door for abrahamic art of lying without which judaism, christianity, islam, marxism, and postmodernism cannot survive.

    So, while I have a technical criticism of his work, as far as I know he’s largely on the right track, and his criticisms are correct.

    CLOSING: THE HARSH REALITY OF WESTERN SUCCESS: TRUTH, MARKETS(Meritocracy) AND EUGENICS/

    As far as I know, Peterson is reliant upon a combination of cognitive science and literary science, to use parables to inform for success and diagnose for unhappiness. And this is the traditional role of pagan myth. THe fact that parables make use of ‘external observer’ effect and convey every dimension of reality as do all stories, is something that should be of obviously anyone with experience in therapeutic psychology, knowledge of the function of therapeutic hallucinogens, the art of suggestion, or artificial intelligence.

    Why? We are suggestible in when fire gazing and listening to stories because of the effect of the suspension of disbelief. By visualization via narrative analogy we can experience in the first, second or third person, that which we might feel pain in analyzing within ourselves.

    It was only with abrahamism that the method of teaching and curing was weaponized against the underclasses in order to rally them against the aristocracy. It had a not insignificant role in the destruction of ancient civilization, and it is having a current highly significant role in destroying the modern civilization.

    Why? Man was not oppressed. Man was and remains a beast that was first self domesticated ingroup, then forcibly domesticated by more domesticated outgroups by the combination of agrarian discipline, harsh winters, upward redistribution of reproduction, constraint on reproduction, delayed reproduction, aggressive exposing, sacrificing, hanging, burning,plague , illness, starvation, and war.

    And the distribution of prosperity today is determined by the success or failure at that reduction of the scale of the underclass that has not yet been sufficiently domesticated for autonomous, responsible, participation in modernity.

    Western man’s failing is the promotion of abrahamic underclass values via democracy and equality, rather than the origins and success of western civilization in truth, rule of law (non-discretionary rule. rule without rulers), Markets in everything – the consequence of which is incremental eugenics through upward redistribution of reproduction.

    And that is the difference between the honesty of the ancient world, and the ongoing deception of the modern.

    We are unequal. And our inequality is manageable, as long as we continue to shrink the size of the undomesticated lower classes until they are gone. After that we may find that our definition of lower classes may incrementally evolve. But at present it appears that there is a maximum human capacity around an average of 115-120, which means that we were close to optimum in the west before the industrial revolution. And that we have lost as much as a full standard deviation in average intelligence in less than 150 years.

    And if rates of immigration and reproduction continue, we will have reduced humanity to barbarism once again before the end of the century.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-19 10:14:00 UTC

  • Rates in other fields. Rates of homosexuaity.Mental illness=female distributions

    Rates in other fields. Rates of homosexuaity.Mental illness=female distributions. That moral biases=female distributions. Low trust endemic.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-18 19:49:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/887398927003262976

    Reply addressees: @BaruchKogan @Yisro_Reuel @EOTOverton

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/887395018306183169

    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/887395018306183169

  • by Daniel Gurpide By the way, I am not reproaching Christianity for defending th

    by Daniel Gurpide

    By the way, I am not reproaching Christianity for defending the weak who are unjustly oppressed. I reproach Christianity for exalting weakness and viewing it as a sign of election and title of glory. I reproach Christianity for not helping the weak become strong.

    And I’m not arguing against the principle of equality per se, but the obsession of a doctrine that pursues the progressive equalisation of life, which in a world that is complex and diverse, and necessarily generating inequalities, can only end up in the gradual loss of energy: entropy.

    In a way, being Westerners we cannot be but Christian (some sort of). I choose the Christian valorisation of truth as something worth dying for – a step beyond the Socratic stance – as the positive aspect of the Christian West, and this is what makes me tell you that traditional Christianity is just an exercise in LARPing.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-18 18:32:00 UTC

  • HUMAN PERSONALITY IS EXTENSION OF THE THE PREY DRIVE (attn: Jordan Peterson foll

    HUMAN PERSONALITY IS EXTENSION OF THE THE PREY DRIVE

    (attn: Jordan Peterson followers)

    I’ve been working this for bit and while I have a lot more, this is the basic idea and I wanted to get it out there.

    The point being that of the five(six) biological personality systems, they appear to be external consequences of each phase of the Prey Drive.

    This puts our biochemistry and personality into the framework that is missing. It explains why we have those particular personality traits, and all that derives from them.

    1) SEARCH (Self): Rest

    2) STRESS: Need for Stability:

    Stress triggers your automatic nervous system, or fight-or-flight response. A period of arousal is followed by a return to normalcy and calm. Individuals with higher N scores have a shorter trigger and can’t take a lot of stress before feeling it. People with lower N scores are able to take abundant amounts of stress before feeling it.

    3) SEARCH: (Thing) Originality:

    Novelty is the trigger. Dopamine is widely considered the “creativity” chemical, with levels of dopamine and dopamine receptors related to one’s ability to hold visual images in the mind. Your O score represents the point at which you have used up your available dopamine in your pursuit of novelty and your system says “no more novelty or complexity. Take me back to the simple and familiar, the tried and true.”

    4) SEARCH: (Other) Extraversion:

    Sensation, or the five senses, is the trigger. Your E score is an estimate of the point when your motoric nervous system is aroused, becomes saturated with sensation and craves relief. Extraversion is traditionally associated with sociability because other people are the most common source of stimulation. People with higher E scores can take more sensation before becoming saturated.

    5) “STALK” – Consolidation:

    Distractions are the trigger. The arousal system supporting C behaviors is the attentional focus system, greatly impacted by levels of testosterone. High levels of testosterone are associated with a greater capacity for sustained, repetitive, goal-focused behavior. Distractions trigger the attentional system, causing loss of focus.Your C score is an estimate of the point when you finally say, “That’s enough focusing for now. Time for a break.”

    6) “KILL”/DOMINANCE/ – CHASE/RETREAT- DEFEND/SUBMISSION:

    Dominance vs Submission Excitement vs Calm Oppy vs Loss

    Accommodation:

    The trigger is dominance. The arousal system consists of sex hormones (such as testosterone and estrogen) and serotonin, the neurotransmitter involved in sleep, depression and memory. For people with a relative abundance of male hormones and a relative deficit of female hormones, defiance is the norm. Someone with an opposite balance of hormones would normally be submissive. Your A score is an estimate of the point when you tire of being defiant and turn submissive.

    7) TRANSITION: SUCCESS vs FAILURE (Self)

    Dominance reward vs submission reward

    8) EAT, SHARE, NURSE (other),RETURN TO REST(1),

    There you go.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-18 14:27:00 UTC

  • 2) AFAIK group members select for traits ind.-advant. in the local group, that r

    2) AFAIK group members select for traits ind.-advant. in the local group, that relies on a strategy, that results in ind.-expr. of traits.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 19:31:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/886669663215734784

    Reply addressees: @JayMan471 @SpeakingBee

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/885485834308333568

    IN REPLY TO:

    @JayMan471

    @SpeakingBee A) That’s not true B) Group selection doesn’t exist https://t.co/UYUFRfwnSv

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/885485834308333568

  • THE ANSWER 1) Our moral biases are transferred genetically, and predictably. (ye

    THE ANSWER

    1) Our moral biases are transferred genetically, and predictably. (yes)

    2) These biases are expressions of the distribution of male and female reproductive biases necessary for our survival.

    3) All of us are born with some distribution of male and female sentiments.

    4) These biases are complementary but competitive and mutually exclusive.

    5) The distributions of Socialist, Libertarian, and Conservative reflect the female, aspiring male, and dominant male reproductive strategies.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 16:32:00 UTC

  • It is rational to take drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, fried food, sugar, and lethar

    It is rational to take drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, fried food, sugar, and lethargy. It is rational to take gifts, hand outs, subsidies, rents, and extortions. It’s rational to choose myth over literature, literature over history, history over philosophy, philosophy over law, law over engineering, engineering over science, and science over mathematics. It is rational to tell white lies, grey lies, black lies, and to evil lies. It is rational to beg, steal, rape, murder, plunder, and war.

    So in the choice to believe in god or gods, it is counter intuitive to choose gods. In the choice to choose gods or science it is counter intuitive to choose science. in the choice between narrative and calculation it is counter intuitive to choose calculation. In the choice between lie and truth it is counter intuitive to choose truth.

    When engaged in deception of the self or others it is rational to state the non-demonstrable rather than the demonstrable.

    Pascal’s wager is inaccurate. “It is only rational to hedge a belief in gods if one thinks and acts as if none exists.”

    The purpose of religion is anti-social: to prevent you from reason. Only a demon would demand and command as Jehovah.

    —“Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.”— Aurelius (a Stoic)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-16 12:07:00 UTC

  • WE DON”T NEED EVERYONE —“We’ll be fine as long as a few men don’t fall prey to

    WE DON”T NEED EVERYONE

    —“We’ll be fine as long as a few men don’t fall prey to their stupidity. Or maybe God pits our stupidity against one another in order to concoct His masterpiece.”— Megan K. Usui

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 10:02:00 UTC

  • “Have the Jordan Peterson followers realized their tribalism is turning into/has

    —“Have the Jordan Peterson followers realized their tribalism is turning into/has turned into a cult yet?”—

    I am pretty sure that Peterson has restated Stoicism(self authoring), using cognitive science, and combined it with literary analysis as allegory to cognitive science, and produced a contender for a secular synthesis and restatement of the religions of our pagan, christian, and secular ages.

    So it is possible that he’s founding a Reformation – and possibly the reformation people arguably want. And a reformation we need very much, because Marxism-Postmodernism was a false and pseudoscientific religion. And to some degree I see him as attempting to provide a scientific religion in opposition to the pseudoscientific religion of marxism-postmodernism.

    I’m about the same age, and I work on the inverse of Peterson’s work – epistemology, testimony, law, politics, and group evolutionary strategy. So where he tries to provide tools of meaning to teach, I try to find tools of decidability to judge.

    But I’ve come to very similar conclusions. And it is fairly hard to possess a general knowledge of the state of cognitive science, the history of evolutionary biology and psychology, the history of cooperation(economics), the history of conflict (law), and to come to very different conclusions.

    So you can frame his work as education. And maybe a cult. But if you want to frame peterson’s work as a self-help cult, well, you wouldn’t be the first person to say such a thing. But then, that is the purpose of literature, myth, and religion.

    I agree with him deeply on most subjects, but the difference is that in the choice between teaching mental discipline and teaching mental coping mechanisms, I place greater emphasis on the former and he the latter. Which is what you would expect from a Paternally biased Judge (me), and Maternally biased Teacher (him).

    Given that we can teach by science(theoretical first causes), history(evidence of our behavior), literature(temporal analogy), myth(eternal analogy) and never claim more than analogy, my frustration is that I don’t agree that the Abrahamic cults (judaism, christianity, islam, marxism-postmodernism) that move beyond analogy to the utopian, the ideal and the supernatural, are necessary or beneficial.

    I find the abrahamic religions as among the worst evils in human history, and that life prior to them, and that history tells us that life in their absence both in the far east, and in our ancient world, and in our modern world leave us little choice but to deeply question why the utopian, ideal, and supernatural produce anything except the psychological equivalent of drug addiction and addiction behavior.

    So that is the ‘debate’ I think we should have. Not whether Peterson is stumbling upon a restoration, or a reformation, but whether he will improve the modern version of abrahamic cults (marxism-postmodernism), or whether he will simply perpetuate it, such that it returns in an even more virulent form.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 02:22:00 UTC

  • “Have the Jordan Peterson followers realized their tribalism is turning into/has

    —“Have the Jordan Peterson followers realized their tribalism is turning into/has turned into a cult yet?”—

    I am pretty sure that Peterson has restated Stoicism(self authoring), using cognitive science, and combined it with literary analysis as allegory to cognitive science, and produced a contender for a secular synthesis and restatement of the religions of our pagan, christian, and secular ages.

    So it is possible that he’s founding a Reformation – and possibly the reformation people arguably want. And a reformation we need very much, because Marxism-Postmodernism was a false and pseudoscientific religion. And to some degree I see him as attempting to provide a scientific religion in opposition to the pseudoscientific religion of marxism-postmodernism.

    I’m about the same age, and I work on the inverse of Peterson’s work – epistemology, testimony, law, politics, and group evolutionary strategy. So where he tries to provide tools of meaning to teach, I try to find tools of decidability to judge.

    But I’ve come to very similar conclusions. And it is fairly hard to possess a general knowledge of the state of cognitive science, the history of evolutionary biology and psychology, the history of cooperation(economics), the history of conflict (law), and to come to very different conclusions.

    So you can frame his work as education. And maybe a cult. But if you want to frame peterson’s work as a self-help cult, well, you wouldn’t be the first person to say such a thing. But then, that is the purpose of literature, myth, and religion.

    I agree with him deeply on most subjects, but the difference is that in the choice between teaching mental discipline and teaching mental coping mechanisms, I place greater emphasis on the former and he the latter. Which is what you would expect from a Paternally biased Judge (me), and Maternally biased Teacher (him).

    Given that we can teach by science(theoretical first causes), history(evidence of our behavior), literature(temporal analogy), myth(eternal analogy) and never claim more than analogy, my frustration is that I don’t agree that the Abrahamic cults (judaism, christianity, islam, marxism-postmodernism) that move beyond analogy to the utopian, the ideal and the supernatural, are necessary or beneficial.

    I find the abrahamic religions as among the worst evils in human history, and that life prior to them, and that history tells us that life in their absence both in the far east, and in our ancient world, and in our modern world leave us little choice but to deeply question why the utopian, ideal, and supernatural produce anything except the psychological equivalent of drug addiction and addiction behavior.

    So that is the ‘debate’ I think we should have. Not whether Peterson is stumbling upon a restoration, or a reformation, but whether he will improve the modern version of abrahamic cults (marxism-postmodernism), or whether he will simply perpetuate it, such that it returns in an even more virulent form.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-15 02:21:00 UTC