Curt Doolittle

Theme: Science

  • THE “SCIENCE” OF SCOTT ADAMS’ HYPERBOLE Scott Adams’ (@ScottAdamsSays ) hyperbol

    THE “SCIENCE” OF SCOTT ADAMS’ HYPERBOLE
    Scott Adams’ (@ScottAdamsSays ) hyperbole on the race question was obvious to anyone who uses hyperbole to illustrate a point that requires the combination of scaling, time, and inverse logic.

    The problem is, that inverse (negative) logic is the first capacity humans lose as IQ declines below 105. And it’s ‘gone’ by around 90. The same for ‘auto-scaling’ using hyperbole: “what if everyone did this all the time over time.” And that declines to literal interpretation by the same scale. Masculine cognitive bias provides a scale advantage, and Feminine cognitive bias (empathizing) provides a scale disadvantage. (FWIW: our current AI’s still can’t do inverse logic. Not possible.)

    Feminine and Leftists are ‘simple’, ’empathizing’, and ‘literal’. Meaning short-term experiential thinking. And Masculine and Conservatives use hyperbole for long-term systemic thinking.

    Men can at least vaguely understand leftist (feminine) men and women, but leftist (feminine) men and women cannot understand conservatives.

    It’s not complicated. It’s pretty well covered in the scientific literature. Even the difference between how men do math as models and women do math as pictures. This is the origin of our cognitive emotional ethical and moral differences: sex.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-16 14:15:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1636370513059799040

  • Well, it turns out that all unreproducible ‘science’ justifies left leaning clai

    Well, it turns out that all unreproducible ‘science’ justifies left leaning claims. Something those of us who follow retractions take for granted given the compounding evidence.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-15 00:53:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635806391179833345

    Reply addressees: @chhopsky @NMassian @OpenAI

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635697512874139648

  • PEOPLE WILL ABSOLUTELY RESPOND NEGATIVELY TO THE RESULTS OF MY WORK. (JUST LIKE

    PEOPLE WILL ABSOLUTELY RESPOND NEGATIVELY TO THE RESULTS OF MY WORK. (JUST LIKE DARWIN)
    I fully realize a lot of what I do is difficult to comprehend. I can only write for a certain audience.

    Why?
    Imagine it’s 1750.
    Darwin travels back in time just 100 years, and uses the word evolution and explains it. Same problem.

    We still have vast numbers of the world who not only don’t understand evolution, but don’t believe, it or that it’s possible. And passionately.

    Why should I be any different if I’m just taking darwin to its complete and logical conclusion, uniting the sciences?

    Breaking the long history of thinking of everyone as the same, into everyone is a variation in the distribution of male to female OPPOSITES in perception, cognition, valuation, want, and language is kind of a big leap that answers most of the present hard questions in the world.

    But why would you think I’d get less hostile a reaction for that innovation than darwin did for his -and while Darwin’s work had social and religious implications, my work has psychological, political, and economic implications.

    People will respond negatively to my work more so than darwin’s. Especially the left who it exposes as even greater purveyors of superstition and false promise than religions ever did.
    …

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 23:11:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635780622982475776

  • PEOPLE WILL ABSOLUTELY RESPOND NEGATIVELY TO THE RESULTS OF MY WORK. (JUST LIKE

    PEOPLE WILL ABSOLUTELY RESPOND NEGATIVELY TO THE RESULTS OF MY WORK. (JUST LIKE DARWIN)
    I fully realize a lot of what I do is difficult to comprehend. I can only write for a certain audience.

    Why?
    Imagine it’s 1750.
    Darwin travels back in time just 100 years, and uses the word evolution and explains it. Same problem.

    We still have vast numbers of the world who not only don’t understand evolution, but don’t believe, it or that it’s possible. And passionately.

    Why should I be any different if I’m just taking darwin to its complete and logical conclusion, uniting the sciences?

    Breaking the long history of thinking of everyone as the same, into everyone is a variation in the distribution of male to female OPPOSITES in perception, cognition, valuation, want, and language is kind of a big leap that answers most of the present hard questions in the world.

    But why would you think I’d get less hostile a reaction for that innovation than darwin did for his -and while Darwin’s work had social and religious implications, my work has psychological, political, and economic implications.

    People will respond negatively to my work more so than darwin’s. Especially the left who it exposes as even greater purveyors of superstition and false promise than religions ever did.
    …

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 23:11:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635780622844043265

  • PEOPLE WILL ABSOLUTELY RESPOND NEGATIVELY TO THE RESULTS OF MY WORK. (JUST LIKE

    PEOPLE WILL ABSOLUTELY RESPOND NEGATIVELY TO THE RESULTS OF MY WORK. (JUST LIKE DARWIN)
    I fully realize a lot of what I do is difficult to comprehend. I can only write for a certain audience.

    Why?
    Imagine it’s 1750.
    Darwin travels back in time just 100 years, and uses the word evolution and explains it. Same problem.

    We still have vast numbers of the world who not only don’t understand evolution, but don’t believe, it or that it’s possible. And passionately.

    Why should I be any different if I’m just taking darwin to its complete and logical conclusion, uniting the sciences?

    Breaking the long history of thinking of everyone as the same, into everyone is a variation in the distribution of male to female OPPOSITES in perception, cognition, valuation, want, and language is kind of a big leap that answers most of the present hard questions in the world.

    But why would you think I’d get less hostile a reaction for that innovation than darwin did for his -and while it had social and religious implications, my work has psychological, political, and economic implications.

    People will respond negatively to my work more so than darwin’s. Especially the left who it exposes as even greater purveyors of superstition and false promise than religions ever did.
    …

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 23:11:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635779663199862792

  • Ugh. (a) social pseudoscience. (b) economists are aught that people report false

    Ugh. (a) social pseudoscience. (b) economists are aught that people report falsely, that almost all surveys and models fail replication, that they contrive their results, that sample sizes are too small, and that the samples rely on student volunteers most likely to virtue signal. This survey isn’t public, doesn’t state it’s N, and is constructed.
    Ergo: we use the opposite model of demonstrated preference in voting or economy. OR what I do, use social media to create a kink of the hill game, and provoke a moral outrage and record the logic by which individuals attempt to conduct deception or coercion in favor of their biases. Linguistic analysis is the most successful method to day of determining intelligence and personality, moral biases, and in my case … how people lie to themselves and others.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 22:45:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635774108850896897

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635733709705076736

  • Ugh. (a) social pseudoscience. (b) economists are aught that people report false

    Ugh. (a) social pseudoscience. (b) economists are aught that people report falsely, that almost all surveys and models fail replication, that they contrive their results, that sample sizes are too small, and that the samples rely on student volunteers most likely to virtue signal. This survey isn’t public, doesn’t state it’s N, and is constructed.
    Ergo: we use the opposite model of demonstrated preference in voting or economy. OR what I do, use social media to create a kink of the hill game, and provoke a moral outrage and record the logic by which individuals attempt to conduct deception or coercion in favor of their biases. Linguistic analysis is the most successful method to day of determining intelligence and personality, moral biases, and in my case … how people lie to themselves and others.

    Reply addressees: @SFrinlan @ConceptualJames

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 22:45:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635774108775350272

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635733709705076736

  • Yes. you’re right. Of course it is 😉 That it’s deterministic is the only thing

    Yes. you’re right. Of course it is 😉
    That it’s deterministic is the only thing that should surprise us … and humble us. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 22:23:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635768662773645313

    Reply addressees: @thaeus01

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635743954816716800

  • FEMALE AND JEWISH METHODS OF THINKING VS MALE AND EUROPEAN (science, testimony,

    FEMALE AND JEWISH METHODS OF THINKING VS MALE AND EUROPEAN
    (science, testimony, sovereignty, and reciprocity are male concepts.)

    Women are just as aggressive and warlike as men, they just express aggression and war differently from men: by parasitism, special pleading, relativism, undermining, social construction, seduction (baiting into hazard), sedition, treason.
    So if we study male and female differences we observe that the Jews conduct warfare as do women. Why? Weakness, empathizing, verbal acuity: devotion, nepotism, seduction (baiting into hazard), double standards, pilpul(sophistry) and critique(undermining), social construction, sedition, and treason.
    Why? I wont’ get into this in detail but there are pretty large differences between the races in subtle expression. And ingroup traditions accelerate group selection.
    So to some degree (and once you see it you can’t unsee it) the semitic peoples as a trend, jews in general somewhat, and the ashkenazi in particular have either narrowed or reversed cognitive sexual dimorphism.
    We can see this in race differences in expression of mental illness and antisocial behavior, as well as means of expression (langauge) means of argument (aggression), occupational selection (talking, ‘shopping’, ‘hazarding’), family organization, political affiliation, and religious or cultural literature (critique).
    So, personally I find it fascinating. And professionaly I find it allowed me to solve most of our problems by minor reform to the law, that prohibit female antisocial to warfare behavire, as thoroughly as male antisocial to warfare behavior.
    And you know what? That let me understand what’s wrong with the world regardless of sex. Lots of baiting into hazard – everywhere.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 17:30:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635694879706689548

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635691424258699281

  • FEMALE AND JEWISH METHODS OF THINKING VS MALE AND EUROPEAN (science, testimony,

    FEMALE AND JEWISH METHODS OF THINKING VS MALE AND EUROPEAN
    (science, testimony, sovereignty, and reciprocity are male concepts.)

    Women are just as aggressive and warlike as men, they just express aggression and war differently from men: by parasitism, special pleading, relativism, undermining, social construction, seduction (baiting into hazard), sedition, treason.
    So if we study male and female differences we observe that the Jews conduct warfare as do women. Why? Weakness, empathizing, verbal acuity: devotion, nepotism, seduction (baiting into hazard), double standards, pilpul(sophistry) and critique(undermining), social construction, sedition, and treason.
    Why? I wont’ get into this in detail but there are pretty large differences between the races in subtle expression. And ingroup traditions accelerate group selection.
    So to some degree (and once you see it you can’t unsee it) the semitic peoples as a trend, jews in general somewhat, and the ashkenazi in particular have either narrowed or reversed cognitive sexual dimorphism.
    We can see this in race differences in expression of mental illness and antisocial behavior, as well as means of expression (langauge) means of argument (aggression), occupational selection (talking, ‘shopping’, ‘hazarding’), family organization, political affiliation, and religious or cultural literature (critique).
    So, personally I find it fascinating. And professionaly I find it allowed me to solve most of our problems by minor reform to the law, that prohibit female antisocial to warfare behavire, as thoroughly as male antisocial to warfare behavior.
    And you know what? That let me understand what’s wrong with the world regardless of sex. Lots of baiting into hazard – everywhere.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle

    Reply addressees: @superkanga @KiwiBreeder

    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 17:30:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635694879543111680

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635691424258699281