Curt Doolittle

Theme: Measurement

  • (a) causality results in (b) distribution and (c) stereotypes are the most accur

    (a) causality results in (b) distribution and (c) stereotypes are the most accurate measure in social science, just as iq is the most accurate measure in psychology.

    You are also unaware that you just demonstrated feminine cognition by demonstrating disapproval of an unpleasant empirical, logical, and scientific truth in favor of avoiding social conflict and thereby exporting the responsibility for adaptation to the cognitively masculine.

    Reply addressees: @JFrancisLawton @donmasra @EPoe187

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-12 12:09:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1690334575958822913

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1690267752240390145

  • “Q: ARE YOU DOING PHILOSOPHY? NO. NOT REALLY.” Argh. Technically what I do is no

    “Q: ARE YOU DOING PHILOSOPHY? NO. NOT REALLY.”

    Argh. Technically what I do is not philosophy but formal science. Formal science is one of the four sciences: formal(logic), physical(before), behavioral(during), and evolutionary(after).

    I consider myself an anti-philosophy scientist. However, not only does no one understand the definition of science, but no one understands the distinction between science and philosophy. So for the sake of simplicity, I say I’m a philosopher and social scientist specializing in epistemology(knowledge), decidability(truth), law(conflict), and economics(cooperation).

    So, I work in the logic of decidability. The Formal logic of decidability. It’s a Formal operational logic. That means it’s different from formal set logic. Formal set logic uses symbols for categories. Operational logic uses names of operations instead of symbols. Both are formal in that they require unambiguous grammars of continuous recursive disambiguation. It’s the difference between abstract mathematics independent of context and scale and concrete and discrete computation dependent upon context and scale: a vast difference.

    The simple version is that I (we at NLI) write what looks like English, reads like programming, describes a supply-demand curve, and is just a different category of mathematics (ordinal or semantic, or ‘dictionary’) – terms that require explaining:
    cardinal(quantitative order) >
    … ordinal(qualitative order) >
    … … semantic (domain, dictionary, list order).

    I realize that I am, we are, trying to cause a rather grand leap in human thought, as large as the leap from theology to philosophy, or philosophy to science.

    So it’s quite an adaptation of ‘frame’ we’re asking of people – even if the benefits of doing so are as great as every other leap.

    The problem has been finding a means of simplifying it such that we can teach it effectively to larger numbers of people – which we think we’re able to do now.

    But like any formal discipline (STEM Knowledge) it’s more work than you’d expect. Partly because learning something you don’t know is easier than re-learning something you already think you know.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-10 18:24:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689704275033706496

  • Different standard. A standard refers to the rigor of the methodology and the pe

    Different standard. A standard refers to the rigor of the methodology and the permissible dimensions
    Rationalism(Kant) is a higher standard than philosophy(Plato), just as empiricism a higher standard than rationalism.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-10 17:22:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689688777327800322

    Reply addressees: @univcompass

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689683366650552334

  • “Q: Curt: What’s your definition of Philosophy?”– I use, and we at NLI use, the

    –“Q: Curt: What’s your definition of Philosophy?”–

    I use, and we at NLI use, the methodology of “Disambiguation by enumeration, serialization, and operationalization into a system of measurement”.

    The series of wisdom literatures consists of:
    Mythology(Suggestion, myths, anthropomorphism, counting) >
    … Religion(Command, parables, rules, arithmetic) >
    … … Philosophy(Justification, literature, sets, reason, geometry) >
    … … … Empiricism (Falsification, history, rationalism algebra)>
    … … … … Science (Testimony, logic, instrumentation, calculus)>
    … … … … … Operational Logic (Demonstration, first principles, computation, adversarial simulation)

    Disambiguation by Limits
    Therefore, via disambiguation, a wisdom literature is defined by its limits, and its limits by what it is not.

    Sequence
    This disambiguation (evolutionary series) describes the arc of anthropomorphic and anthropocentric to the opposite, in which man is merely another product of evolutionary computation of continuous recursive disambiguation of disorder into by the simple laws of the universe.

    The Cause of the Sequence
    The evolution of wisdom literatures consists of the gradual replacement of ignorance, anthropocentrism and storytelling with knowledge, materialism(the irrelevance of man), and measurement.

    Philosophy’s Position In the Sequence
    Philosophy, or what is most often termed ‘fantasy moral literature’ in the imitators of Plato, is a bridge between religion and rationalism. And Epicurus and Aristotle the bridge between socratic philosophy and empiricism (natural philosophy).

    Religion and Philosophy also imply the search for the good. Empiricism, Science, and Operationalism imply the search for truth with which we may then consider the good.

    At the present time, as far as I know, we have completed the disambiguation of philosophy and science such that the domain of truth is produced by science and operationalism, but that the choice of good is determined by philosophy and history, and theology is but a test of the durability of a claim of the good over centuries.

    The Unambiguous Definition of Philosophy
    The unambiguous definition of philosophy is the production the reduction of ignorance, error, presumption, and bias, through a systematic method, consisting of critical skepticism (testing), disambiguation, and decomposition (analysis), necessary to study, (falsify), causes and consequences of the fundamental questions, concepts, and principles of everyday life and of nature, encouraging us to investigate what we are ignorant of or err upon, resulting in the pursuit of improving human individual and group understanding, valuation, and choice, and justifying that knowledge to others, so that it might spread for personal and collective advantage.

    Differences
    Philosophy differs from Religion in that it seeks to advance the human condition through increasing knowledge, agency, and ability, while theology seeks to produce consistent behavior regardless of knowledge, agency, and ability. This is why religious communities advance more slowly than philosophical, and philosophical more slowly than scientific.
    But it’s also why theology, then philosophy, then empiricism, then science, then operationalism place increasingly costly burdens on the individual’s ability to obtain and make use of increasingly complex knowledge, that is increasingly difficult to comprehend.
    Ergo we not only require theology, philosophy, science, and operationalism for increases in precision, but for teaching incrementally, and for graceful failure by those lacking ability to learn increasingly abstract complexities.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation

    Reply addressees: @univcompass

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-10 16:14:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689671510946881536

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689649092463669248

  • I Capture notes. (note how frequently brad teases me about how much I write down

    I Capture notes. (note how frequently brad teases me about how much I write down.) Then we write it all down in declarative prose, and yes, largely memorize it. While the vast scope of the work seems impossible to hold in your head (it is), methodology and the the list of first principles isn’t that large, and so it’s rather easy to reconstruct everyday questions and answers using those principles. I think Brad explains it best as it’s more the process of unlearning what we’ve learned that’s false (sort of like theology) and replacing it with what’s true. So you don’t try to memorize it as much as work with it enough (like math and physics and programming) so you develop the intuition.

    Reply addressees: @FarajRashi93307

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-09 19:56:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689365097825628161

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689362214652690432

  • As far as I know Ashkenazi IQ is between 108 (likely) and 110 (less likely). Unt

    As far as I know Ashkenazi IQ is between 108 (likely) and 110 (less likely). Until the industrial revolution reversed darwinian reproduction, the IQ of anglos was probably similarly in the 100 to 115 range which is rather obvious from the evidence. (I spoke to Lynn about this quite a bit before he passed.)
    As far as I know, the Ashenazi distribution is wider, so there are more over 140 than Europeans, just as (as far as I know) the east asian distribution is narrower.
    As far as I know the Ashkenazi IQ advantage is by higher verbal intelligence. It is also declining because of outmarriage.
    If you follow me I explain in detail race differences in intelligence, and in particular the masculine european vs feminine Ashkenazi difference in intelligence – the only two groups that produce intellectuals of consequence for reasons I also explain elsewhere.
    There is, however an unstated value to feminine cognition applied to female preferred work – work capacity is higher because it’s less costly. Again, something I can explain elsewhere.
    We are in a period where verbal aculity, feminine cognition, and overproduction of the clerical class is an extraordinary value – though AI will likely end most of that rather quickly.
    The jews specialize in professions that are also biased in favor of feminine cognition, feminine conflict, and competition strategy – though I don’t want to go into that here. Those professions, like seduction, focus on baiting into hazard, under plausible deniability.
    They do not focus on production particularly of commons.

    Reply addressees: @Airmanareiks @UBERSOY1 @JeanReinfort @polygenic_ @KirkegaardEmil @jollyheretic

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-08 23:59:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689063768787996673

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689044364545159168

  • This data is nonsense. It’s using only 100k people and from non-random sources,

    This data is nonsense. It’s using only 100k people and from non-random sources, and I can’t even figure out if it was a web survey or something legitimate.
    AFAIK German IQ at 99 is reversing the flynn effect like most advanced countries by a combination of taxes that suppress…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-08 23:47:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689060826097819649

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689050152756031488

  • Hmm… just because disambiguation is what I do for a living, I’d say: (a) most

    Hmm… just because disambiguation is what I do for a living, I’d say:
    (a) most of us lack the ability to construct definitions from first principles, even if all definitions can be (with work) reduced to constructions from first principles, and simplified as a description of a sequence of logical or physical actions.
    (b) defining a term by disambiguation is extremely burdensome.
    (c) there is a wide divergence between communicating with a large number of people using common vocabulary (wide net) and speaking precisely so that your argument is closed to inflation, conflation, or misdirection so the economics of communication prohibit that clarity (narrow net).
    (d) and the audience is generally lost by trying to. 😉
    (e) In general, our experience teaching in our ‘one room schoolhouse’ is that it takes a person with high systematizing and high intelligence about two to three years of work to learn to speak unambiguously, by learning to think unambiguously.

    That’s a long way of saying it’s possible but it’s not practical, so as usual, Bob is correct. 😉

    Reply addressees: @BobMurphyEcon

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-07 01:35:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1688363218190598144

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1688303389703012352

  • I’ve done the research on this subject and it’s very difficult given the minor v

    I’ve done the research on this subject and it’s very difficult given the minor variations in test scores due to the word-association and example-association used for personality testing, to separate genetics from culture. In IQ we do have the alleles (markers) so that a correlation between intelligence and genes is obvious. But when we get to personalty testing, in its current state of development, it’s better to say that (a) noetenic evolution is consistent in describing race differences, and (b) racial stereotypes we observe in behavior are about right (aggression, mindfulness). (c) the most interesting personality data is the prosociality of Africans – which demonstrates that a minor group difference in personality traits appears as widespread expression across all of life. (d) the most obvious is the jewish verbal, asian mathematical and european mixed equilibrium with the south eurasians and the africans behind all three. I’d explain the reasons but I get enough hate for doing this work as it is. 😉

    Reply addressees: @FlorianRose_

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-03 21:17:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1687211186608082944

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1687207751511093248

  • We’d need pretty good data. I have no way of testing that and I might presume ju

    We’d need pretty good data. I have no way of testing that and I might presume just the opposite having been married to women on the pill for long periods.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-03 19:53:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1687189993385504768

    Reply addressees: @JaredAberach @liberaequa @EPoe187

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1687186472787759104