by Jim Leis So as a very simple example, complexity structurally demands trial. And also innately breaks up large populations in preference for smaller ones; large ant hills and wolf packs split at certain sizes. Actually, complexity demands it. So, on a very base level, globalism is too hierarchical and statist for complexity. Globalism, socialism, communism, will never work because it drives complexity out of a society. Which will kill it. Put another way, a king’s power is in upholding the rule of law. If he amasses too much power, regulating business, property, etc., he relegates his fellow citizens to robots and kills complexity, and then kills society.
Theme: Cooperation
-
Markets Serve the Demands of Complexity
by Jim Leis So as a very simple example, complexity structurally demands trial. And also innately breaks up large populations in preference for smaller ones; large ant hills and wolf packs split at certain sizes. Actually, complexity demands it. So, on a very base level, globalism is too hierarchical and statist for complexity. Globalism, socialism, communism, will never work because it drives complexity out of a society. Which will kill it. Put another way, a king’s power is in upholding the rule of law. If he amasses too much power, regulating business, property, etc., he relegates his fellow citizens to robots and kills complexity, and then kills society.
-
I’ve written about the problem of men learning to listen to women for years now,
I’ve written about the problem of men learning to listen to women for years now, and it seems like one of those things that we ought to be taught as a general man-rule.
The trick two listening to women is listening 10% and thinking about something else 90% rather than asking a woman to distill her thoughts down to the 10% of facts that matter.
Worse, we don’t get all the signaling involved between women – it doesn’t exist – so the entire point of communication may in fact be nothing other than the transfer of signals.
Unfortunately there is no course in ‘woman speak’ for men to take. Even if it’s the most valuable course we could take.
I just listen. And ask questions. The hard part is learning NOT TO TRY TO SOLVE A PROBLEM. Just listen.
I think the problem occurs when women ask men to experience their emotions the way another woman does, when they share experiences. This forces men to lie – to pretend either that they understand them, or that they feel them, or that they even can feel them.
What I’ve found is that if a woman explains how she felt I can undrestand it. But describing the circumstance itself does not help me understand it. Finally, to just show that I understand, and usually that her feelings were justified.
The hard part is not trying to inquire or solve the problem but just show you understand, accept, and let her express (exit, expend, exhaust) her emotions.
It’s different with staff. Some women need to be taught that when talking to men, it’s JUST THE FACTS, and WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO DO?. Otherwise the woman is using my much shallower emotional reservoir and clouding my judgement.
Most people by a large margin prefer male bosses for the simple reason that we don’t get involved in the emotional stuff. But it’s actually because we don’t even see it, hear it, or understand it. And if we do, we consider it childish and it makes us angry.
The trick for men with women is always patience. 😉
Which is in fact, the trick with all human beings.
Patience is the under appreciated and misunderstood.
Why? ‘Cause it’s costly
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-10 14:30:00 UTC
-
MARKETS SERVE THE DEMANDS OF COMPLEXITY by Jim Leis So as a very simple example,
MARKETS SERVE THE DEMANDS OF COMPLEXITY
by Jim Leis
So as a very simple example, complexity structurally demands trial. And also innately breaks up large populations in preference for smaller ones; large ant hills and wolf packs split at certain sizes. Actually, complexity demands it.
So, on a very base level, globalism is too hierarchical and statist for complexity. Globalism, socialism, communism, will never work because it drives complexity out of a society. Which will kill it.
Put another way, a king’s power is in upholding the rule of law. If he amasses too much power, regulating business, property, etc., he relegates his fellow citizens to robots and kills complexity, and then kills society.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-10 10:05:00 UTC
-
I DON’T HATE. JUST ACCEPT SOME OF US MUST SEPARATE I don’t hate on any group. Th
I DON’T HATE. JUST ACCEPT SOME OF US MUST SEPARATE
I don’t hate on any group. The fact that it is in some our our interests to separate and some of our interests to mix, is simply an expression of the affordability of that option. Wealth allows expression of preferences.
Some of us prefer separatism (because we have superior group traits that provide us premiums) and some of us prefer integration (because we can gain from superior groups or inferior group discounts).
So it is in the interest of people from inferior groups and often with inferior traits to seek the benefits of superior groups.
The question is only whether it is of benefit (profit) to the host, or harm (loss) to the host. And in general transfer of professionals that reduces the price of professional services is of benefit, while transfer of labor which reduces the price of labor is of harm.
The simple reason being that lowering professional costs and raising labor costs is in the group’s interest.
My argument is that groups must pay the cost of domesticating their own, and if they cannot domesticate their own, and worse, if they export their own – causing externalities by doing so – they lose the reciprocal obligation to permit sovereignty (self rule).
This is a terribly simple problem: Pay for your own costs – one way or another.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-08 08:26:00 UTC
-
CONFLICT VS FIGHTING For sake of argument, let’s say Conflict is something that
CONFLICT VS FIGHTING
For sake of argument, let’s say Conflict is something that occurs with people who you share interests, or care about. But Fighting and Warfare on the other hand are what you do when you do not share interests or care about them.
I hate conflict. I love a fight.
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-07 19:20:00 UTC
-
“Do lions and hyenas think of love, markets or hate? no. but that does not stop
—“Do lions and hyenas think of love, markets or hate? no. but that does not stop them from competing for and defending territory.”— Neil A. Bucklew
Source date (UTC): 2018-06-06 23:39:03 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1004507996326694913
-
Our Inequality Requires Juridical Equality
We are unequal by every possible measure, but to preserve the incentive to, and benefits of, cooperation, the law must adjudicate our interests equally. For this reason the law must always and everywhere treat our interests as equal and our abilities and value to one another unequally.
-
Our Inequality Requires Juridical Equality
We are unequal by every possible measure, but to preserve the incentive to, and benefits of, cooperation, the law must adjudicate our interests equally. For this reason the law must always and everywhere treat our interests as equal and our abilities and value to one another unequally.
-
Long History of The Study of Dual Ethics
We take for granted our monological ethics. But while MOST groups practice CAST ethics, almost no other people practiced MONOLOGICAL ethics. The difference being that progressive restitution required (higher classes required higher restitution). But the law was the same for all. This is what we mean by “Rule of Law”: no discretion, same law for all, no law applied in retrospect. —“…the Jews must be mentioned. Their conduct is regulated by a ‘dual code‘; their conduct towards their fellows is based on one code (amity), and that towards all who are outside their circle on another (enmity). The use of the dual code, as we have seen, is a mark of an evolving race. My deliberate opinion is that racial characters are more strongly developed in the Jews than in any other race.”— —Sir Arthur Keith, A New Theory of Human Evolution, (London: Watts & Co., 1948), 390.