Curt Doolittle

Theme: Responsibility

  • I am not arguing against free speech whatsoever. I’m arguing that people are not

    I am not arguing against free speech whatsoever.
    I’m arguing that people are not honest and moral and that most speech consists of either manipulation or deception or fraud – we simply justify it.

    So, I’m explaining that there are rational incentives. for both the state and the population. The state could act immorally – but so can the people, or at least some segment of them.

    The most common examples are:
    (a) Popular Lying by saying “they’re shooting people” or “there is a bomb threat at x locations” where x locations favor one party or candidate or another.
    or
    (b) State Lying by denying they’re oppressing voters, closing voting stations, rigging votes or election places.

    The question isn’t free speech. It’s free truthful speech. And when both the people and the state lie (Turkey is a low trust country), then we can either choose to risk by leaving the channel for mass communication open for all or closed for all, given that both the state and the people are incentivized to lie.

    For all practical purposes, elections are not restitutable (reversible) except through revolt or civil war. As such all peoples must make a deliberate choice which risk to take given that both sides lie.

    FWIW: your virtue signaling that we call ‘getting on your high horse’ is just lying that your side’s incentives to lie cheat and steal elections are any different from the other sides. This is a wonderful privilege each moral bias happily grants itself despite the evidence.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute.

    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @zeyburay @TheSilentOG @elonmusk @krassenstein @mattyglesias

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-14 18:35:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657816993536278529

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657803680626638851

  • Tip: responsibility is responsbility. Operatonalize the verb to be. In this case

    Tip: responsibility is responsbility. Operatonalize the verb to be. In this case responsibility causes exposere to making judgements.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-14 02:03:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657567197961519105

    Reply addressees: @anderstegn @DwightExMachina

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657564096621953026

  • “Q: Curt: If men seek status through accumulation of responsibility. Is that all

    –“Q: Curt: If men seek status through accumulation of responsibility. Is that all men, just European men, or particularly European men.”–

    Great question. 😉

    Any universal category (ie: men) will consist of a distribution. So some little, some a lot, most around average. But the same rule applies. Because male reproductive strategy is to accumulate competency, capital, resonsibility for capital, and the status that results precisely because it’s advatageous in every possible way, and reproductively, because women are hyperconsumptive and hypergamic when acting by on their own volition, and men will select them by desirable traits when women aren’t acting of their own volition (which is pretty rare really despite historical narratives, except for slaves).

    European civilization maximizes individual responsibility, for self, family, kin, kith, and especially commons, more than all other civs combined. So it’s european men MORE so than other men.

    In fact, you could reduce civilizational differences to just differences in what males seek responsbility for, and what they are able to do with that responsibility, and how far those actions deviate from reciprocity.

    So ‘especially european men’. Which is largely why we are tolerated or accepted around the world because we are the least likely (on average) to engage in irresponsibility. (Japanese are often as good or better, but are more discriminating and less tolerant of variation.)

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Reply addressees: @DwightExMachina

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-14 01:37:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657560704428146689

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657558745302331393

  • RT @WalterIII: MALE HIERARCHY ITSELF IS PART OF THE COMMONS The alpha male belie

    RT @WalterIII: MALE HIERARCHY ITSELF IS PART OF THE COMMONS
    The alpha male believes “commons production” is part of his personal responsib…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 22:40:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657516274455330817

  • Really? Do you have a means of falsifying it, becaue all the evidence is that wh

    Really? Do you have a means of falsifying it, becaue all the evidence is that what I stated is correct. I wasn’t severe enough of course, because it’s that mothers are counter productive as children age. But my point was that both parents, and even better, larger extended…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-13 18:43:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657456491081678849

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657455148980113408

  • They are both reflections of sex differences in cognition with the feminine prey

    They are both reflections of sex differences in cognition with the feminine prey response responsible for offspring and consumption in time seeking status by irresponsibiity for comons, vs the masculine predator stronger sex responsible for territory and resources over time seeking status by responsibility for commons. This is the origin (causality) of all human differences in cognitive bias. Everything else is neotenic evolution, genetic load, and developmental stress. So the disambiguation between oppression (social stress in hierarchy) and conspiracy (political stress by competitors) assists in maintaining causality (construction of all explanation from first principles (causes)).

    You’re using the feminine framing in both cases. Males or Females may oppress females (actualy it’s domestication of their undermining, hyperconsumption and hypergamy). And Males may conspire to compete for dominance within group (to domesticate, to produce superior ends, or prey upon). But outsiders amplfiy the problem creating unity internally against externals (war). Hence the universal historical elite display of creating group cohesion through warfare whether the threat existed or not.

    Reply addressees: @ViriatusII

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-12 12:31:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1657000648213184512

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656970449668960257

  • Moral principles are relatively obvious – in the via negativa and demonstrably u

    Moral principles are relatively obvious – in the via negativa
    and demonstrably universal. That’s something we’ve learned empirically over time. Especially in international law..

    Moral NORMS in the via positiva are historically just utilitarian given the group strategy of the people. Mostly, civilizational differences in positive norms are due to the trust and trustworthiness of the people. Which in turn is largely due to absence of heterogeniety on one dimension and absence of corruption on the other.

    Positive moral principles are also identifiable and while it took quite a bit of work to prove, are rather simple in the end.

    So just as we are learning the most parsimonious science we are learning the most parsimonious morality. Its just that some people don’t like tthe truth. They like their immorality.

    Reply addressees: @OtonielFilho5

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-11 01:38:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656473910496436228

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656471127873429505

  • Worse, you’re presuming we don’t live in a primarily liars-all system already. H

    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

  • Violence like flame, is a resource that can be put to good or ill. In particular

    Violence like flame, is a resource that can be put to good or ill.
    In particular organized violence can be put to extraordinary good, or extraordinary ill.
    Heroism consists of paying the costs of investment in the commons.
    Status we give to heroes is their compensation for…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-10 18:25:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656364954788962304

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656360355780612096

  • RT @TheMcMullan: ‘all leftism, every single word of it, is just crime: irrecipro

    RT @TheMcMullan: ‘all leftism, every single word of it, is just crime: irreciprocity, evasion of responsibility, projection, and reflection…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-05-09 22:23:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656062407070957568