Mar 4, 2020, 5:57 PM by Ryan O’Connor
—“First competence: consume P accurately.”—Luke Weinhagen
Still working on step one. It’s like going back to school… okay, not LIKE it, it IS going back to school – and learning a new subject. I’m reading English, but it feels like a foreign language – having to re-read and look up terms, check context. I haven’t had to really use my brain this much in years 😅 But thanks for everyone who puts it all out and breaks it down for the rest of us.
Mar 11, 2020, 8:19 AM Work it backwards. If you want a pareto distribution (20% professional) you want an average IQ of around 112-115 at present levels of technology. Conversely we can’t shift too much farther until we determine how to limit eccentricities (defects) above 140’s. My intuition is that those defects are due to the fact of simply being outliers during development. But it could be that higher investment parenting is necessary.
—“A drop of 6 points in the average IQ of a population can have very significant effects. In the US an IQ of 115 is about the minimum required for professionals such as engineers, doctors, lawyers etc. This is about 16% of a population with average IQ 100 but only about 8% of a population with an average IQ of 94. The decline in the really high IQ “smart fraction” would be even greater. On the other hand Linda Gottfredson has stated that in the current US economy a person with an IQ below 75 is essentially useless. That is about 5% of a population with an average IQ of 100 but about 10% of a population with an average IQ of 94. So a reduction in IQ has a “double whammy” diminishing the highly productive proportion of the population and increasing the economically useless proportion. I doubt that a population with an average IQ of 94 would have much chance of being a really First World nation. The difference between the IQ of say Turkey and the countries of Northwest Europe is roughly six points or maybe a little more.”— Jim
Mar 11, 2020, 8:19 AM Work it backwards. If you want a pareto distribution (20% professional) you want an average IQ of around 112-115 at present levels of technology. Conversely we can’t shift too much farther until we determine how to limit eccentricities (defects) above 140’s. My intuition is that those defects are due to the fact of simply being outliers during development. But it could be that higher investment parenting is necessary.
—“A drop of 6 points in the average IQ of a population can have very significant effects. In the US an IQ of 115 is about the minimum required for professionals such as engineers, doctors, lawyers etc. This is about 16% of a population with average IQ 100 but only about 8% of a population with an average IQ of 94. The decline in the really high IQ “smart fraction” would be even greater. On the other hand Linda Gottfredson has stated that in the current US economy a person with an IQ below 75 is essentially useless. That is about 5% of a population with an average IQ of 100 but about 10% of a population with an average IQ of 94. So a reduction in IQ has a “double whammy” diminishing the highly productive proportion of the population and increasing the economically useless proportion. I doubt that a population with an average IQ of 94 would have much chance of being a really First World nation. The difference between the IQ of say Turkey and the countries of Northwest Europe is roughly six points or maybe a little more.”— Jim
Mar 11, 2020, 11:35 AM
—“Are there any books you would recommend on the early history of European peoples? I read a post of yours recently and realized There were several references I didn’t pick up. Specifically when you reference things about “indo-Europeans”, etc. Thanks. Interested in learning more about what informs your perspective on Christianity and it’s triumph over Olympian religion. You seem to view it as a net negative. Do you have any recommendations for other groups on FB having the types of discussions you are having?”— A Friend
ANSWERS There is nowhere to learn more, better, faster, than following daily here. It is the lowest cost education you can get, in the education you want and need. My reading list is on the website under the Propertarianism menu heading. All of it is available for free in our digital library. The IE history is simple. Although I would recommend chapter one of Armstrong’s “Transformation” so you learn about the differences in the emergence of different religious traditions. Religion is the ‘hard problem’ because our religion is communicated with the Abrahamic Technique. And there is no easy way of reforming that religion without gradual supplement with what used to be stoicism-empiricism and natural law, and letting nature take it’s course. The only reason I’m interested in our IE religions is because they’re ethnocentric, and christianity is not. I view abrahamic deceit, submission, and universalism as antithetical to our civilization. You can ask the other leadership for advice. I’m a little overwhelmed with biz, video, and writing at the moment.
Mar 11, 2020, 11:35 AM
—“Are there any books you would recommend on the early history of European peoples? I read a post of yours recently and realized There were several references I didn’t pick up. Specifically when you reference things about “indo-Europeans”, etc. Thanks. Interested in learning more about what informs your perspective on Christianity and it’s triumph over Olympian religion. You seem to view it as a net negative. Do you have any recommendations for other groups on FB having the types of discussions you are having?”— A Friend
ANSWERS There is nowhere to learn more, better, faster, than following daily here. It is the lowest cost education you can get, in the education you want and need. My reading list is on the website under the Propertarianism menu heading. All of it is available for free in our digital library. The IE history is simple. Although I would recommend chapter one of Armstrong’s “Transformation” so you learn about the differences in the emergence of different religious traditions. Religion is the ‘hard problem’ because our religion is communicated with the Abrahamic Technique. And there is no easy way of reforming that religion without gradual supplement with what used to be stoicism-empiricism and natural law, and letting nature take it’s course. The only reason I’m interested in our IE religions is because they’re ethnocentric, and christianity is not. I view abrahamic deceit, submission, and universalism as antithetical to our civilization. You can ask the other leadership for advice. I’m a little overwhelmed with biz, video, and writing at the moment.
Teach Applied P Not P-Method https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/28/teach-applied-p-not-p-method/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-28 20:50:18 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1266109566028320778
Mar 20, 2020, 12:19 PM by Luke Weinhagen
—“Then why are people so overwhelmed by P so often?”—
Teaching people how to replicate P methodology and to produce P output is complex. (discovered-P/constructed-P) Teaching people how to consume P output is simple. (applied-P) We say to people “we have the answer” then they ask “Ok, what is it?” and we start teaching them how to construct P. But this is not the answer is it? This is how to find the answer – and we advertised that we already had the answer. So those seeking the answer get overwhelmed by lessons in methodology they never sought. How can they not be confused and overwhelmed? In offering the methodology in response to “What is the answer?” we create the perception that the only way to access the answer is to construct it yourself. It is the teachers curse. We value the “how” and the “why” and project that value onto anyone asking the “what”. We are conflating production and output. I think John’s success, and the success we are seeing ITV have, are at least in part because they de-conflate production and output and offer their audiences a consumable framing of output. (this is not a dumbing down, it is giving the market what it is specifically asking for – the answer). (CD: This was helpful. thanks)
Mar 20, 2020, 12:19 PM by Luke Weinhagen
—“Then why are people so overwhelmed by P so often?”—
Teaching people how to replicate P methodology and to produce P output is complex. (discovered-P/constructed-P) Teaching people how to consume P output is simple. (applied-P) We say to people “we have the answer” then they ask “Ok, what is it?” and we start teaching them how to construct P. But this is not the answer is it? This is how to find the answer – and we advertised that we already had the answer. So those seeking the answer get overwhelmed by lessons in methodology they never sought. How can they not be confused and overwhelmed? In offering the methodology in response to “What is the answer?” we create the perception that the only way to access the answer is to construct it yourself. It is the teachers curse. We value the “how” and the “why” and project that value onto anyone asking the “what”. We are conflating production and output. I think John’s success, and the success we are seeing ITV have, are at least in part because they de-conflate production and output and offer their audiences a consumable framing of output. (this is not a dumbing down, it is giving the market what it is specifically asking for – the answer). (CD: This was helpful. thanks)
Mar 20, 2020, 1:04 PM By John Mark
—“So moral-reasoning in P is not hard. But what about the Grammars, Testimonial Truth, Operational Language, Strictly Constructed Laws, and the Abrahamic Method of Deceit?”– CD
What can the avg person grasp, and/or what do we need to give them a glimpse of out of necessity? Strictly Constructed Laws – even if they don’t understand the details, this can be sold as solution to activist judges and undermining of the constitution. (You did a great job explaining it on most recent P-constitition video interview.) Abrahamic Method – the term itself triggers Christians, but the basic concept of “don’t say anything that excuses a violation of reciprocity” is understandable by the avg person. Testimonial Truth – details a bit much for avg person, but concept that there’s a checklist courts use to figure out whether a public figure is lying, I think is understandable, and may be necessary to “sell” free truthful speech vs free speech. And the avg person may be able to understand certain aspects of it, such as the concept of lying by omission or lying by mixing 2 concepts/definitions together.
Mar 20, 2020, 1:04 PM By John Mark
—“So moral-reasoning in P is not hard. But what about the Grammars, Testimonial Truth, Operational Language, Strictly Constructed Laws, and the Abrahamic Method of Deceit?”– CD
What can the avg person grasp, and/or what do we need to give them a glimpse of out of necessity? Strictly Constructed Laws – even if they don’t understand the details, this can be sold as solution to activist judges and undermining of the constitution. (You did a great job explaining it on most recent P-constitition video interview.) Abrahamic Method – the term itself triggers Christians, but the basic concept of “don’t say anything that excuses a violation of reciprocity” is understandable by the avg person. Testimonial Truth – details a bit much for avg person, but concept that there’s a checklist courts use to figure out whether a public figure is lying, I think is understandable, and may be necessary to “sell” free truthful speech vs free speech. And the avg person may be able to understand certain aspects of it, such as the concept of lying by omission or lying by mixing 2 concepts/definitions together.