Curt Doolittle

Theme: Agency

  • People are rational. Choosing to ‘be good’ is in many people’s interest – at lea

    People are rational.

    Choosing to ‘be good’ is in many people’s interest – at least in the long term.

    But choosing to ‘be bad’ is in many other people’s interest – at least in the short term.

    The principle problem in expanding the size of the good, is that each individual who chooses to be bad has greater influence upon others’ ability to choose to be good, than each individual who chooses to be good has influence upon those who choose to be bad.

    In other words, roughly speaking, every person at the bottom is six times as costly as the benefits created by every person at the top. For the simple reason that discouragement, gossip, threat and failure spread fear of risk faster and farther than encouragement, compliment, opportunity and success.

    There is nothing to be done about human nature.

    All we can do is make it very difficult to be bad.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-09 10:38:00 UTC

  • THE CENTURY OF MADWOMEN As far as I can tell, the left’s liberalism, anti-famili

    THE CENTURY OF MADWOMEN

    As far as I can tell, the left’s liberalism, anti-familialism, school-anarchism, and ‘tolerance’ has produced a vast increase in mental illness the origin of which is simply the prohibition that we demand discipline from one another.

    When I travel the world this is the main difference between our culture and others. We are not more progressive or more tolerant, we are simply failing to educate the human animal to funciton as a member of a polity – and they’re going insane in vast numbers because of it.

    I see this as the ultimate expression of the feminine: to escape accountability for the management of her impulses. And what is the reason? Women evolved to have children in their teens where those impulses are governed by the offsetting demand to care for children.

    We have created madwomen in vast numbers.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-31 13:15:00 UTC

  • There is a difference between being skilled at confrontation, and disliking it.

    There is a difference between being skilled at confrontation, and disliking it. I dislike it intensely which is why I am good at it.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-17 19:15:00 UTC

  • I look at ordinary men and I love them. Fathers and their children. Families. I

    I look at ordinary men and I love them. Fathers and their children. Families. I love them and admire them because I cannot be them. I cannot find joy in those things that they find joy – any more than they can find joy in those things that I find joy.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-16 12:11:00 UTC

  • ***When someone accuses you of moral relativism, what they mean is not relative

    ***When someone accuses you of moral relativism, what they mean is not relative but meritocratic. So respond with DYSGENIC absolute equality, and EUGENIC absolute meritocracy.***

    There is nothing relative about it. Both eugenic and dysgenic moral rules are absolutes. It’s whether we lie about the value of the underclasses or not.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-11 16:46:00 UTC

  • Stoicism as a response to increase in scale.

    (by James Augustus Berens ) JA BERENS ON STOICISM AND SCALE —“Stoicism functions as a tool for limiting the scope of human cognitive processes (cognition & responses to perceived changes in state) to the consequential (actionable at individual scale). The scope of man’s cognitive processes evolved under tribal/local scale with limited complexity. Under more complex systems, like those of post-industrial societies, information surpasses the scale of individual actionability, yet because of our innate cognitive biases we respond to, perceive and approach information as if it were consequential.

    Complexity and the [perceived] randomness of events eliminate the feedback/information man receives from his actions. That is, as complexity increases, the difficulty of calculating the consequences of a given action or set of actions increases. Thus the need for stoicism as a mental instrument for goal-directed action in an increasingly complex world. It is no surprise, then, that much in the way that Doolittle and Taleb attack pseudoscience via operationalism and probability theory, respectively, we see a resurgence of stoicism guided by operational and probabilistic thinking. In respect to the former, we decrease uncertainty and launder our thoughts of error, bias, [self] deceit and wishful thinking; and, in respect to the latter, under uncertainty, through the investment and coordination of action to produce a convexity of returns/results (anti-fragility): investment in portfolios with limited down side and unlimited upside.”— James Augustus Berens SAME PROBLEM FACING THE GREEKS. Scale

  • Stoicism as a response to increase in scale.

    (by James Augustus Berens ) JA BERENS ON STOICISM AND SCALE —“Stoicism functions as a tool for limiting the scope of human cognitive processes (cognition & responses to perceived changes in state) to the consequential (actionable at individual scale). The scope of man’s cognitive processes evolved under tribal/local scale with limited complexity. Under more complex systems, like those of post-industrial societies, information surpasses the scale of individual actionability, yet because of our innate cognitive biases we respond to, perceive and approach information as if it were consequential.

    Complexity and the [perceived] randomness of events eliminate the feedback/information man receives from his actions. That is, as complexity increases, the difficulty of calculating the consequences of a given action or set of actions increases. Thus the need for stoicism as a mental instrument for goal-directed action in an increasingly complex world. It is no surprise, then, that much in the way that Doolittle and Taleb attack pseudoscience via operationalism and probability theory, respectively, we see a resurgence of stoicism guided by operational and probabilistic thinking. In respect to the former, we decrease uncertainty and launder our thoughts of error, bias, [self] deceit and wishful thinking; and, in respect to the latter, under uncertainty, through the investment and coordination of action to produce a convexity of returns/results (anti-fragility): investment in portfolios with limited down side and unlimited upside.”— James Augustus Berens SAME PROBLEM FACING THE GREEKS. Scale

  • Psychological Terminology Was Invented to Lie.

    HINT: ALL PSYCHOLOGICAL TERMS ARE LIES, JUST AS ALL RELIGIOUS TERMS ARE LIES. HUMANS SEEK TO ACQUIRE IN FURTHERANCE OF THEIR REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY. EVERYTHING ELSE IS POSTURING AND NEGOTIATION. The only thing that differs is our reproductive strategy: Gender, Class, Age, Race. Jessa Faya Alexander —“How about: Empaths seek connection, Sociopaths seek power; your results may vary”—

    Curt Doolittle To experience the feeling of “connection: is a impulsive MEANS to an evolutionary END. That women tend to be incognizant of the ends that they pursue by seeking their emotions is simply to say that they are less human and more animal than men. A sociopath(ends) like an empath(means) can pursue either moral ends or immoral ends. There is no moral difference between immoral sociopaths(ends) and immoral empaths (means). Just as there is no moral difference between moral sociopaths(ends) and moral empaths(means). The difference lies only in animal impulse and lying about, and human reason and telling the truth of it.

  • Psychological Terminology Was Invented to Lie.

    HINT: ALL PSYCHOLOGICAL TERMS ARE LIES, JUST AS ALL RELIGIOUS TERMS ARE LIES. HUMANS SEEK TO ACQUIRE IN FURTHERANCE OF THEIR REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY. EVERYTHING ELSE IS POSTURING AND NEGOTIATION. The only thing that differs is our reproductive strategy: Gender, Class, Age, Race. Jessa Faya Alexander —“How about: Empaths seek connection, Sociopaths seek power; your results may vary”—

    Curt Doolittle To experience the feeling of “connection: is a impulsive MEANS to an evolutionary END. That women tend to be incognizant of the ends that they pursue by seeking their emotions is simply to say that they are less human and more animal than men. A sociopath(ends) like an empath(means) can pursue either moral ends or immoral ends. There is no moral difference between immoral sociopaths(ends) and immoral empaths (means). Just as there is no moral difference between moral sociopaths(ends) and moral empaths(means). The difference lies only in animal impulse and lying about, and human reason and telling the truth of it.

  • WOMEN ARE CAPABLE OF RATIONAL THOUGHT. MEN ARE CAPABLE OF RESPONSIBLE THOUGHT. I

    WOMEN ARE CAPABLE OF RATIONAL THOUGHT. MEN ARE CAPABLE OF RESPONSIBLE THOUGHT.

    https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/10154785265992264

    ITS HARDER FOR WOMEN TO FIND MEN TO TRUST

    https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/10154785328047264

    A FATHER NEEDS TO BE THE ONE MAN A WOMAN CAN TRUST

    https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/10154788310172264

    THIS TRUST ISSUE MIGHT BE VERY IMPORTANT

    https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/10154790756607264

    I NOTICE THE TRUST THING EVERYWHERE

    https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/10154810769102264

    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-09 21:17:00 UTC