The mirror always lies.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 17:15:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657434383341477888
Reply addressees: @Herman56712
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657426149897646084
The mirror always lies.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 17:15:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657434383341477888
Reply addressees: @Herman56712
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657426149897646084
π Yes. But I spent about a year – a frustrating year – learning that they have learned the abrahamic method of deceit, so thoroughly, that it’s instinctual to lie. And its impossible for them to take responsibility for anything – at all.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 01:04:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657190156993011713
Reply addressees: @Psyche_OS
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657185029796028416
Correct – and of course, we know why – even though the entire postwar academy and political systems seek to like to us:
(a) homogeneity advances trust by limiting competition for norms traditions values and investments.
(b) high trust communities a more amenable to redistribution because of it.
(c) And small ethnically homogenous polities have the lowest possible power distance with the minimum scale polity for production, commons, and interclass service, without the cost of intergenerational decline.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
Reply addressees: @heimbergecon
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-12 17:02:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657068653664149504
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657057544857157633
Azov love to make fun of you by using nazi symbols because they know you fear them like vampires fear crosses. π
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-12 03:55:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656870613443641345
Reply addressees: @Lev_Melnyk
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656380728555327493
CONSERVATIVES AREN’T STUPID
One more bit. Oppression narratives are the cognitively female and liberal version of cognitively male and conservative conspiracy narratives.
This sex difference in cognitive biases originates in sex differences in status seeking. Females seek status by evasion of responsibility and hyperconsumption, while males seek status by accumulatino of responsibilty and captialization.
So, the difference as in all things left vs right, is that we take male antisocial nonsense seriously because males are dangerous, and we ignore female antisocial nonsense because women aren’t dangerous.
At least, women weren’t dangerous until given the franchise. Now the opposite is true, and the present age is caused by the noise as the signal of women’s influence in politics travels through the civilizations institutional, traditional, normative, habitual, and cognitive capital structures.
This particular problem (which I can’t fully determine whether is cultural or biological) has allowed the industrialization of the female method of antisocial behavior using oppression narratives to take root in a population whose education, consumption, and voting is dominated by white females. (white females are the only group that defects from their ethnicity.
We endured marxism as we brought the lower classes into the franchise – a search for control. Now we’re enduring feminism as we bring females in to the franchise – a search for contrrol.
And unfortunately we’ve not falsified the female search for control as we have the lower class search for control.
π
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-12 01:26:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656833069742006273
There is no argument I have not grasped that can be testified to without lying. Go ahead and try. π Many have before you.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-11 22:12:18 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656784321598898176
Reply addressees: @JohnDuttonTrad
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656782363752386560
That’s because they can’t answer it honestly.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-11 21:24:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656772230733348864
Reply addressees: @barrienorwood1 @anneapplebaum
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656768063474130952
I would argue it’s entirely understandable, but that we tolerate so much lying that all but a few of us can’t filter wheat from chaff and therefore presume the world isn’t understandable. π
(I mean, I teach how to, and it’s hard, but the team will explain that it’s possible.)
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-10 23:56:14 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656448089375354880
Reply addressees: @ScienceMonthly
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656446055574310917
BELIEVE WHAT SCIENCE?
(I deal with this every single day.)
–“Around a third of studies published in neuroscience journals, and about 24% in medical journals, are βmade up or plagiarized,β according to a new paper.”–via Science
Worse, that doesn’t account for the studies that are just bad science, bad statistics, logically ridiculous, or contain nonsense claims not supported by the evidence. And yes I’m talking about behavioral sciences here, as well as the non-sciences that dress up in costume and claim they’re sciences.
Worse, even that doesn’t account for the *implications* the papers produce by means of suggestion.
Worse, generally speaking, if a paper supports the “gated institutional narrative” you can nearly guarrantee it’s false.
So trust the science? It’s like trusting politicians, advertizers, and financial advisors. For the same reason: malincentives.
Scientific papers must be treated as court testimony. Meaning if one performs due diligence, then one can err, but not mislead by statement, inference, or suggestion.
Thanks.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-10 23:55:51 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656447994697334784
Worse, you’re presuming we don’t live in a primarily liars-all system already. How do you know you’re not lying? One can intend to lie, or one can lie by failure of due diligence against lying. In either case one performs and distributes a falsehood. I’ve only interacted with you a few times and I have a pretty good grasp on what you’re lying about by trying to justify a construction. Does that mean yu’re a bad person? No. It means you just don’t know yet.
Reply addressees: @FernandoGLV1212
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-10 22:44:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656429974893613056
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656428410804084738