Curt Doolittle

Theme: Deception

  • It has absolutely nothing to do with loving thy neighbor as you would love yours

    It has absolutely nothing to do with loving thy neighbor as you would love yourself – the extension of familial love to kith and kin. It has everything to do with hatred of they neighbor for not adapting to your form of making sense of the world: your selfishness and greed.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-11 14:01:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1248974346372239361

    Reply addressees: @Anne_Fallible @CrusaderSvcs @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1248973889729896449

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @Anne_Fallible @CrusaderSvcs @JohnMarkSays The dogmatically faithful demonstrate loyalty to one another by loyalty to dogma so that together they create a social construction (tribe), so that together they can serve as a social and political FORCE – a resistance movement – against other tools of status signaling: power.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1248973889729896449

  • And instead of intolerance of those who do not imitate jesus’ teaching of love y

    And instead of intolerance of those who do not imitate jesus’ teaching of love your neighbor as you love yourself, you are intolerant of others who do not satisfy your selfish demand that others understand the world on your terms.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-11 13:56:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1248973168557072384

    Reply addressees: @Anne_Fallible @CrusaderSvcs @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1248972236993761280

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @Anne_Fallible @CrusaderSvcs @JohnMarkSays It is you who are anti-christ. For you jesus was a prophet. For some of us he was a philosopher. For others he was a law giver. For others a social scientist. Because each of us differs in how we understand the world, emotionally, rationally, practically, or empirically.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1248972236993761280

  • And your demand for obedience to YOU, to YOUR interpretation of dogmatic text, t

    And your demand for obedience to YOU, to YOUR interpretation of dogmatic text, to YOUR faith in abandoning reason, rather than our faith in tradition of followers of jesus, our imitation of jesus, or in our reason about him, is a violation of jesus’ teaching.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-11 13:48:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1248971071958769669

    Reply addressees: @Anne_Fallible @CrusaderSvcs @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1248969497710600194

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @Anne_Fallible @CrusaderSvcs @JohnMarkSays The question is whether one is “anti” Jesus’ teachings, or “anti” dogmatic text that was added to those teachings by others, or anti those who pretend to follow Jesus but don’t. We follow jesus by action, and action alone. Whether by faith, tradition, or reason.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1248969497710600194

  • The question is whether one is “anti” Jesus’ teachings, or “anti” dogmatic text

    The question is whether one is “anti” Jesus’ teachings, or “anti” dogmatic text that was added to those teachings by others, or anti those who pretend to follow Jesus but don’t. We follow jesus by action, and action alone. Whether by faith, tradition, or reason.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-11 13:41:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1248969497710600194

    Reply addressees: @Anne_Fallible @CrusaderSvcs @JohnMarkSays

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1248957940138213376

  • PROSECUTION ONLINE I have for a decade now, taught the same strategy. 1. Return

    PROSECUTION ONLINE

    I have for a decade now, taught the same strategy.

    1. Return any taunt they made as dispassionately as possible.

    2. Call them a liar or failing due diligence.

    3. State your central argument

    4. repeat until they are exhausted.

    All they do with every cycle is provide you with opportunity to recite the same statements “you are lying, either by design, or by failure of due diligence, [this is the truth], you can either refute it by testimony and warranty within the limits of liability (… 1. Refutation), or offer an equally criticizable solution to the question so that we can judge it’s possibility costs and benefits (2. Competition.), or seek to understand what you clearly don’t (3. Question). But at present you are [lying, denying, fictionalizing, sophistry, pseusocience,mysticism, impossibility, irreciprocity].

    Just do the same thing over and over again and they will eventually expose themselves out of frustration – works every time if you stick with it over time.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-11 13:21:00 UTC

  • One does not sell a liar – one prosecutes him. You cannot get them to agree. So

    One does not sell a liar – one prosecutes him.

    You cannot get them to agree. So deny the enemy the field.

    You can leave them defeated such that they come to their own conclusions.

    But no man is a hero to his debtors.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-11 13:13:00 UTC

  • THE LIES The Lies: “I reject, I disapprove, I disagree, I’m wary, I don’t believ

    THE LIES

    The Lies: “I reject, I disapprove, I disagree, I’m wary, I don’t believe, or engaging in ridicule, shaming, moralizing or psychologizing.”

    None of these are a form of reciprocity: an argument – they’re counter-signaling in lieu of argument. And lacking argument because of one’s ignorance or incompetence. And cowardice in admission of one’s ignorance or incompetence.

    An intellectually honest man does not counter signal like a woman, but either seeks to understand by asking questions, or posits a counter proposition that is open to equal criticism. counter signaling is a violation of reciprocity – a pretense of knowledge when one has none.

    You have only THREE intellectually honest propositions:

    … 1. Refutation.

    … 2. Competition.

    … 3. Question.

    Or the female (dishonest)

    … 4. Disapproval by counter signaling

    One cannot disapprove of a truth only a preference.

    The female cannot use force, or necessarily physically cooperate, or even use organized force or competition, but she can deprive men of sex, affection, care, and advocacy, and engage in counter signaling, or undermining, and rally other women to counter signal, and undermine. That is their weapon of competition of necessity. It is the means by which the females CREATE MARKET DEMAND for men to SATISFY THEM in exchange for sex, affection, care, advocacy and perhaps most importantly, abstinence from undermining you and those you cooperate with.

    This is why, if not one family one vote, then men and women require different houses, and both the legal prohibition on male violence, as well as the legal prohibition on female avoidance of argument, undermining, and reputation destruction so that both genders are reduced as are all others in the marketplace to cooperation by voluntary exchanges.

    Which was the point of marriage and one family one vote – and one of the principle means by which women’s natural irreciprocity and social superpredation was let loose from the pandora’s box of enfranchisement without equal legal suppression of the female means of superpredation that we had evolved in legal suppression of the man’s means of superpredation.

    We are not consious of the causes of our behavior.

    Which is what I seek to cure.

    And which will restore us to reciprocity.

    And end the conflict.

    And force us back into markets.

    -Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-11 12:27:00 UTC

  • GRAHAM HANCOCK —“Curt, What do you think of Graham Hancock?”— If I’m sympath

    GRAHAM HANCOCK

    —“Curt, What do you think of Graham Hancock?”—

    If I’m sympathetic: I think he is honest about what he does. He makes up, or promotes, myths to inspire and entertain people – to restore wonder to their lives. yes some of what he harps about has a grain of truth in it. I’m charitable because it’s good for us to look back into the past with wonder, the same way we teach children fairy tales so that they will eventually mature into reading history.

    If I’m charitable, the world needs a few of these people so that we make sure wacky stuff doesn’t get overlooked, and the wrong story entrenched (geology in the past and mathematical physics in the present are the best examples).

    If I’m doing my job: he’s using pseudoarchaeology (pseudoscience) to get attention, and it’s been a profitable career for him. and given that his stuff is pretty hard to believe I suspect he’s helping us find suckers, catch them, and reeducate them before they do something harmful to themselves or others. Of all the kind of sucker-magnets in the world he’s the least harmful.

    If I want to correct him, and the audience, it is all but certain that Doggerland, isn’t alone, and the black sea the persian gulf, the red sea, the mediterranean, and the lost lakes and marshes of the south of africa, and various other coastal areas, now obscure much of our long, early, glacial and pre-glacial development with flooding. We may be living in a period of extraordinary technology, but the first five thousand years of chasing the glaciers back north, in doggerland, on the shorts of the black sea has to be about as close to paradise as hunter-gatherers can discover.

    That said, there is no evidence whatsoever of anything pre-glacial but animals, and nothing obscured by post glacial flooding that gave hints to what is necessary for the evolution of man: fire, metal, and pottery. Yes, people do lose technology (austronesians). Yes people do mature into depth rather than neoteny (equatorial africans). But in general, the long graudal line of history up until the 80-40k, and 40k-10k, and 10k incremental explosions, and the past 400 years of european explosion of knowledge, is so regular in retrospect it looks ordinary.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-10 15:23:00 UTC

  • RT @DegenRolf: Women were more prone to magical beliefs than men, making more su

    RT @DegenRolf: Women were more prone to magical beliefs than men, making more suboptimal choices in a lottery task after imagining that a dā€¦

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-09 20:07:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1248341712965156865

  • PACKS AND THE HERD By Coach Noah Revoy Humans are either PACK orientated or HERD

    PACKS AND THE HERD

    By Coach Noah Revoy

    Humans are either PACK orientated or HERD orientated.

    The HERD has a low consciousness hive mind, they are easily controlled, manipulated and spooked.

    The PACK is made up of highly conscious and capable individuals who choose to join the hierarchy for mutual benefit.

    HERDs form by “accident” when a sufficient number of herbivores gather in the same spot. Entry to the HERD is unearned.

    HERDs expand and multiply during good times. When trouble comes they turn on each other, abandoned the young, old, sick and weak. Thus the HERD gets thinned.

    PACKs form to hunt prey and to fight outsiders. To take advantage of opportunity or to deal with a threat. Entry to the PACK is earned.

    PACKs degenerate in the good times. They get fat and lazy. Hard times bring out the sharpness in the wolf. Struggle binds the pack together.

    If you are part of a PACK, then you are PACK orientated.

    If you are not in a PACK you are in a HERD.

    If you are alone, you are still in a HERD, you are just a little lost from the group, probably they left you behind.

    The HERD sacrifices those it leaves behind.

    As life gets harder we will see more men forming PACKs. Struggle brings out the wolf in men.

    The best men are already in PACKs, ready for the break down to signal the start of the hunt.

    The next best men are already looking to form or join a PACK.

    Will you be left behind?

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-06 17:23:00 UTC