Theme: Cooperation

  • Anyway, you asked, I’ll repeat it again…. EIther make an argument against my p

    Anyway, you asked, I’ll repeat it again….

    EIther make an argument against my proposition or stop wasting my time.

    1) We lack agency. Our genes provide intuitionistic decidability. That intuitionistic decidability in matters of cooperation can be expressed on a spectrum from psychotic and solipsistic to ‘normie’ to analytic and autistic. This spectrum describes the differences in male and female brain structures (see Baron Cohen.). We assume we are making choices but we are not. We are merely following instinct. In this distribution the male and female brains produce biases that reflect their caloric and reproductive demands, with female the herd,r,offspring, and male,k,pack and this measurement shows up in all aspects of life from METHOD OF SPEECH, content of gossip, chatter, and banter, selection of terms, means of argument, value judgements, personality profile differences, job selection, time allocation, consumer product purchases, voting records. However, given the industrial technological era, and the independence of females from demand for male income we are seeing demand for ‘fulfillment’ (divergence) in not only gender preferences (toward the extremes) but in class and reproductive preferences (insurance from risk, vs achievement liberty). The more equal the more we diverge in demand for fulfillment of our reproductive strategies. At present we have those of us who prefer to separate from those of you. We experience you as ‘disgusting’ whereas you see fear we see disgust. This is because you are setting off our ‘harm to the tribe’ response. This is also genetic on our end. Truth, Loyalty, Purity are all anti-disgust demands. So in our perception of the world, you are not fully human, but simply semi-domesticated animals that can speak. We do not say this but it is how we perceive you. So we prefer to satisfy our disgust response they way you want to satisfy your fear of being left behind response, and separate from you. The alternative is warfare. Which is frankly more desirable but less profitable.

    2) Ethnocentrism is the optimum group evolutionary strategy, nationalism the optimum means of protecting it, nomocracy and markets in everything, the optimum means of political order to achieving it, and soft eugenics (regulating underclass rates of reproduction) a necessity of defeating regression to the mean, such that demographics correspond to states of development rather than regress the standards of living, because together they produce rates of adaptation faster than all possible alternatives.

    The mediocre seek safety in the herd and speech and defense from the pack. The exceptional seek achievement and action – and to leave its dead weight behind.

    We can afford to speciate by reproductive strategy. You and yours are welcome to speciate by your preferred means, if me and mine are by our preferred means. That is reciprocity. If we cannot agree to reciprocity, then defeat, conquest, enserfment, enslavement, and extermination are preferable to loss.

    The Herd seeks equality, proportionality, and the Pack hierarchy and reciprocity. These are genetic and therefore intuitionistic and pre-cognitive expressions of fitness for social orders.

    So we can Revolt, Separate, Prosper (or not), and Speciate or we can war. The coming civil war is not over race – it is over our new found wealth sufficient to speciate. Or in historical terms, we continue the conflict between masculine indo-european-asian and feminine anatolian-semitic-afro-asiatic.

    This means that we have the opportunity to exit the unfit from our order, and the undesirable from yours.

    Or we have the opportunity to have the bloodiest conflict in human history – and one that it is very hard to imagine the ‘right’ will not win.

    The people who talk, teach, and preach, vs the people who act, produce, and invent.

    If this isn’t acceptable to your and yours, then enemies you choose to be.

    So, this is why we must separate.

    We don’t need to agree.

    It’s just going to happen.

    So the question is only how unpleasant it will be.

    3) We want separation. We don’t want cooperation or balance when the other side daily engages in hate speech against me, my people, my civilization and advocates for our eradication, and the browning of the country in order to exterminate us. SO no. You don’t compromise with those who want genocide —- YOU RETURN THE SAME.

    We don’t WANT YOU AT ALL. You are disgusting. Really. you ruin everything. Our neighborhoods, our schools, our history, our education, our governments, our city streets, our parks, our stores, our religion, our festivals, are armies, or civic order, even our gene pool… .. I mean…. you’re just bad people. We don’t want you. You are like locusts that consume everything beautiful. You are a plague against our people, our civilization, and the efforts of our ancestors. So no. We don’t need you. CIvilizations prosper most by getting rid of the underclass through prosecution and harsh winter starvation. And the fewer of you the better for us and for the planet, and for the future of mankind. You are a living breathing waste of the planet and mankind’s potential.

    We want to ‘leave you behind’.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-13 11:43:00 UTC

  • THE CENTRAL ARGUMENT 1) We lack agency. Our genes provide intuitionistic decidab

    THE CENTRAL ARGUMENT

    1) We lack agency. Our genes provide intuitionistic decidability. That intuitionistic decidability in matters of cooperation can be expressed on a spectrum from psychotic and solipsistic to ‘normie’ to analytic and autistic. This spectrum describes the differences in male and female brain structures (see Baron Cohen.). We assume we are making choices but we are not. We are merely following instinct. In this distribution the male and female brains produce biases that reflect their caloric and reproductive demands, with female the herd,r,offspring, and male,k,pack and this measurement shows up in all aspects of life from METHOD OF SPEECH, content of gossip, chatter, and banter, selection of terms, means of argument, value judgements, personality profile differences, job selection, time allocation, consumer product purchases, voting records.

    However, given the industrial technological era, and the independence of females from demand for male income we are seeing demand for ‘fulfillment’ (divergence) in not only gender preferences (toward the extremes) but in class and reproductive preferences (insurance from risk, vs achievement liberty). The more equal the more we diverge in demand for fulfillment of our reproductive strategies. At present we have those of us who prefer to separate from those of you.

    We experience you as ‘disgusting’ whereas you see fear we see disgust. This is because you are setting off our ‘harm to the tribe’ response. This is also genetic on our end. Truth, Loyalty, Purity are all anti-disgust demands.

    So in our perception of the world, you are not fully human, but simply semi-domesticated animals that can speak. We do not say this but it is how we perceive you. So we prefer to satisfy our disgust response they way you want to satisfy your fear of being left behind response, and separate from you.

    The alternative is warfare. Which is frankly more desirable but less profitable.

    2) Ethnocentrism is the optimum group evolutionary strategy, nationalism the optimum means of protecting it, nomocracy and markets in everything, the optimum means of political order to achieving it, and soft eugenics (regulating underclass rates of reproduction) a necessity of defeating regression to the mean, such that demographics correspond to states of development rather than regress the standards of living, because together they produce rates of adaptation faster than all possible alternatives.

    The mediocre seek safety in the herd and speech and defense from the pack. The exceptional seek achievement and action – and to leave its dead weight behind.

    We can afford to speciate by reproductive strategy. You and yours are welcome to speciate by your preferred means, if me and mine are by our preferred means. That is reciprocity. If we cannot agree to reciprocity, then defeat, conquest, enserfment, enslavement, and extermination are preferable to loss.

    The Herd seeks equality, proportionality, and the Pack hierarchy and reciprocity. These are genetic and therefore intuitionistic and pre-cognitive expressions of fitness for social orders.

    So we can Revolt, Separate, Prosper (or not), and Speciate or we can war. The coming civil war is not over race – it is over our new found wealth sufficient to speciate. Or in historical terms, we continue the conflict between masculine indo-european-asian and feminine anatolian-semitic-afro-asiatic.

    This means that we have the opportunity to exit the unfit from our order, and the undesirable from yours.

    Or we have the opportunity to have the bloodiest conflict in human history – and one that it is very hard to imagine the ‘right’ will not win.

    The people who talk, teach, and preach, vs the people who act, produce, and invent.

    If this isn’t acceptable to your and yours, then enemies you choose to be.

    So, this is why we must separate.

    We don’t need to agree.

    It’s just going to happen.

    So the question is only how unpleasant it will be.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-13 10:27:00 UTC

  • THE CIVIL WAR OVER SPECIATION: THE ARGUMENT: Ethnocentrism is the optimum group

    THE CIVIL WAR OVER SPECIATION: THE ARGUMENT:

    Ethnocentrism is the optimum group evolutionary strategy, nationalism the optimum means of protecting it, nomocracy and markets in everything, the optimum means of political order to achieving it, and soft eugenics (regulating underclass rates of reproduction) a necessity of defeating regression to the mean, such that demographics correspond to states of development rather than regress the standards of living, because together they produce rates of adaptation faster than all possible alternatives.

    The mediocre seek safety in the herd and speech and defense from the pack. The exceptional seek achievement and action – and to leave its dead weight behind.

    We can afford to speciate by reproductive strategy. You and yours are welcome to speciate by your preferred means, if me and mine are by our preferred means. That is reciprocity. If we cannot agree to reciprocity, then defeat, conquest, enserfment, enslavement, and extermination are preferable to loss.

    The Herd seeks equality, proportionality, and the Pack hierarchy and reciprocity. These are genetic and therefore intuitionistic and pre-cognitive expressions of fitness for social orders.

    So we can Revolt, Separate, Prosper (or not), and Speciate or we can war. The coming civil war is not over race – it is over our new found wealth sufficient to speciate. Or in historical terms, we continue the conflict between masculine indo-european-asian and feminine anatolian-semitic-afro-asiatic.

    This means that we have the opportunity to exit the unfit from our order, and the undesirable from yours.

    Or we have the opportunity to have the bloodiest conflict in human history – and one that it is very hard to imagine the ‘right’ will not win.

    The people who talk, teach, and preach, vs the people who act, produce, and invent.

    If this isn’t acceptable to your and yours, then enemies you choose to be.

    -Cheers.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-13 08:25:00 UTC

  • LOVE by Nick’s Reason Love is not something that needs to be ‘found’ or ‘felt’ i

    LOVE

    by Nick’s Reason

    Love is not something that needs to be ‘found’ or ‘felt’ in any great intuitive way. Love is a skill that requires discipline. I can love anyone. In a sexual relationship, all that is required is a sexual attraction and the rest of the love thing is the application and discipline of the skill, love.

    Now, taking it the next step further, to love someone for a lifetime will require other calculations to be made which are again not something that needs to be ‘found’ or ‘felt’ but simply measured, understood and reciprocal. These include character, values & goals.

    With the ingredients of sexual attraction, the application of the loving skill and the measured reciprocation of character, values, and goals you have the recipe of a lifelong relationship.

    The love of a sexual relationship by this definition isn’t any different to how one would love all their other kin (minus the sexuality)

    —“I Love You” means “I promise that if you test the hypothesis that my happiness depends on your own, against my actions, you will not find it untrue”— Eli Harman


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-12 10:14:00 UTC

  • PERCEPTION OF MAN (from elsewhere) The general rule is this: 1) we are super-pre

    PERCEPTION OF MAN

    (from elsewhere)

    The general rule is this:

    1) we are super-predators that have evolved a VAST web of proxies for violence in order to retain the REPEATED benefits of cooperation over the LIMITED returns on predation.

    2) if you participate in the cooperative market you will observe the effects of these proxies as the REFLECTION of regular demonstration of human behavior.

    3) if you participate in the CONFLICT market you will observe the effect of these proxies as OBSCURING the regular demonstration of human behavior.

    4) Manners, lack of access to competitors, because of the affinities of people in social groups, and the threat of local ostracization and violence prevent us from and OBSCURE human behavior.

    5) Internet (the series travel > written word > media > internet) access to ALLIES and COMPETITORS because of the affinity for combatants (political activists) to seek combat (argument).

    6) Therefore, real world social interactions are necessary for safety and for value creation and obscure the vast differences in behavior we can experience directly. Knowledge of competitors (media) exacerbates it. the influence of activists on media exacerbates it. Access to competitors for direct conflict exacerbates it.

    7) we solve the problem of cooperation by the blind men eating the elephant. we can only work with what we can touch, and we can only cooperate with those next to us but if we ever come to understand that those who we don’t out of necessity cooperate with will seize the benefits of not doing so whenever the distance from our physical violence permits, they will.

    I don’t watch television News because it is the worst possible means of obtaining knowledge. I don’t read magazines because they were (are no longer) useful. I don’t really read the news (or pop culture). I do however monitor the social science data and economic data. What changed my mind about following current events, was the proximity of revolution and interest in watching it unfold.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-10 18:08:00 UTC

  • CHRISTIAN TOLERANCE AS FREE RIDING – FAILING TO PAY FOR THE COMMONS —“In my es

    CHRISTIAN TOLERANCE AS FREE RIDING – FAILING TO PAY FOR THE COMMONS

    —“In my estimation, most of what passes for Christian ‘turning the other cheek’ in our time is just cowardice and or weakness and decadence. Its the indecision that people like Joslin have recently written about… the inability to act. In order for such to be a truly valid moral action it would require strength of character and a context in which it was appropriately enacted leading to the betterment of relations between individuals and not just apathy or passivity on the part of the restrainer for evil others benefit.”— Chris Novalis


    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-10 11:30:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    PERCEPTION OF MAN
    (from elsewhere)
    The general rule is this: 1) we are super-predators that have evolved a VAST web of proxies for violence in order to retain the REPEATED benefits of cooperation over the LIMITED returns on predation. 2) if you participate in the cooperative market you will observe the effects of these proxies as the REFLECTION of regular demonstration of human behavior. 3) if you participate in the CONFLICT market you will observe the effect of these proxies as OBSCURING the regular demonstration of human behavior. 4) Manners, lack of access to competitors, because of the affinities of people in social groups, and the threat of local ostracization and violence prevent us from and OBSCURE human behavior. 5) Internet (the series travel > written word > media > internet) access to ALLIES and COMPETITORS because of the affinity for combatants (political activists) to seek combat (argument). 6) Therefore, real world social interactions are necessary for safety and for value creation and obscure the vast differences in behavior we can experience directly. Knowledge of competitors (media) exacerbates it. the influence of activists on media exacerbates it. Access to competitors for direct conflict exacerbates it. 7) we solve the problem of cooperation by the blind men eating the elephant. we can only work with what we can touch, and we can only cooperate with those next to us but if we ever come to understand that those who we don’t out of necessity cooperate with will seize the benefits of not doing so whenever the distance from our physical violence permits, they will. I don’t watch television News because it is the worst possible means of obtaining knowledge. I don’t read magazines because they were (are no longer) useful. I don’t really read the news (or pop culture). I do however monitor the social science data and economic data. What changed my mind about following current events, was the proximity of revolution and interest in watching it unfold.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    PERCEPTION OF MAN
    (from elsewhere)
    The general rule is this: 1) we are super-predators that have evolved a VAST web of proxies for violence in order to retain the REPEATED benefits of cooperation over the LIMITED returns on predation. 2) if you participate in the cooperative market you will observe the effects of these proxies as the REFLECTION of regular demonstration of human behavior. 3) if you participate in the CONFLICT market you will observe the effect of these proxies as OBSCURING the regular demonstration of human behavior. 4) Manners, lack of access to competitors, because of the affinities of people in social groups, and the threat of local ostracization and violence prevent us from and OBSCURE human behavior. 5) Internet (the series travel > written word > media > internet) access to ALLIES and COMPETITORS because of the affinity for combatants (political activists) to seek combat (argument). 6) Therefore, real world social interactions are necessary for safety and for value creation and obscure the vast differences in behavior we can experience directly. Knowledge of competitors (media) exacerbates it. the influence of activists on media exacerbates it. Access to competitors for direct conflict exacerbates it. 7) we solve the problem of cooperation by the blind men eating the elephant. we can only work with what we can touch, and we can only cooperate with those next to us but if we ever come to understand that those who we don’t out of necessity cooperate with will seize the benefits of not doing so whenever the distance from our physical violence permits, they will. I don’t watch television News because it is the worst possible means of obtaining knowledge. I don’t read magazines because they were (are no longer) useful. I don’t really read the news (or pop culture). I do however monitor the social science data and economic data. What changed my mind about following current events, was the proximity of revolution and interest in watching it unfold.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    CHRISTIAN TOLERANCE AS FREE RIDING – FAILING TO PAY FOR THE COMMONS —“In my estimation, most of what passes for Christian ‘turning the other cheek’ in our time is just cowardice and or weakness and decadence. Its the indecision that people like Joslin have recently written about… the inability to act. In order for such to be a truly valid moral action it would require strength of character and a context in which it was appropriately enacted leading to the betterment of relations between individuals and not just apathy or passivity on the part of the restrainer for evil others benefit.”— Chris Novalis

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    CHRISTIAN TOLERANCE AS FREE RIDING – FAILING TO PAY FOR THE COMMONS —“In my estimation, most of what passes for Christian ‘turning the other cheek’ in our time is just cowardice and or weakness and decadence. Its the indecision that people like Joslin have recently written about… the inability to act. In order for such to be a truly valid moral action it would require strength of character and a context in which it was appropriately enacted leading to the betterment of relations between individuals and not just apathy or passivity on the part of the restrainer for evil others benefit.”— Chris Novalis