Curt Doolittle

Theme: Science

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1542129992 Timestamp) —“Are you a right wing libertarian?”— Hard to answer that question any longer. I write on Testimonial (Complete Scientific) Truth; the natural law of reciprocity; nomocracy (rule of law) under that natural law; the uniqueness of western civlization (individual sovereignty, reciprocity, truth, duty, judge-jury-law, and the resulting markets in everything: association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war). In effect the formal logic and science of cooperation that we call ‘social science’ written as ‘law’. “Libertarian” now refers unfortunately to Anarchism since it was usurped by the anarcho capitalists. And “Liberal” has been usurped by the american socialists. And I have lost nearly all my confidence in any form of democracy other than markets – and in doing so moved those markets into the houses of government, eliminating monopoly rule. So classical liberal is not available to me either. You would find my policy recommendations left of center, but my democratic recommendations right of center, and you probably wouldnt understand my economic work. But in the end result, all questions of politics devolve into Masculine Meritocratic, Capitalization, and Eugenics, versus Feminine Equalitarian, Consumption, and Dysgenics. In that sense I am an economic paleolibertarian and an normative paleoconservative in that it is impossible to both be intellectually honest, and sufficiently informed in economics and biology to hold any other proposition than we must pay the underclass to stop reproducing very soon if not immediately, and we must end all underclass immigration and reverse as much of it as possible. There is no other option other than ‘faith’.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1542126100 Timestamp) NO, I’M HONESTLY CALLY POMO’S CRIMINALS. As for dishonest, no, I am HONESTLY (Truthfully also) claiming GA like POMO is a pseudoscientific fraud for the purpose of restoring a secular cult of abrahamic equalitarianism by the same incremental techniques that were used in the ancient world to undermine the aristocracy, by the same process of selling to women in particular and the useful idiots that pursue the favor of those women, to bring about our conquest yet again by immigration and displacement. And no, there is no value in trying to recreate the levantine culture here in the west, It’s been failing for thousands of years. The chinese and the europeans had it right. BUILD WALLS. WOrse, I am claiming that the only incentive to pursue a pseudoscientific fraud is to use cunning as a weapon of coercion against those lacking sufficient agency to comprehend the consequences of the actions thus inspired. So I am honestly calling such people not just fools, but frauds, and in very real terms – criminals, in a crime against humanity. Is that over the top enough? ;)

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1542129992 Timestamp) —“Are you a right wing libertarian?”— Hard to answer that question any longer. I write on Testimonial (Complete Scientific) Truth; the natural law of reciprocity; nomocracy (rule of law) under that natural law; the uniqueness of western civlization (individual sovereignty, reciprocity, truth, duty, judge-jury-law, and the resulting markets in everything: association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war). In effect the formal logic and science of cooperation that we call ‘social science’ written as ‘law’. “Libertarian” now refers unfortunately to Anarchism since it was usurped by the anarcho capitalists. And “Liberal” has been usurped by the american socialists. And I have lost nearly all my confidence in any form of democracy other than markets – and in doing so moved those markets into the houses of government, eliminating monopoly rule. So classical liberal is not available to me either. You would find my policy recommendations left of center, but my democratic recommendations right of center, and you probably wouldnt understand my economic work. But in the end result, all questions of politics devolve into Masculine Meritocratic, Capitalization, and Eugenics, versus Feminine Equalitarian, Consumption, and Dysgenics. In that sense I am an economic paleolibertarian and an normative paleoconservative in that it is impossible to both be intellectually honest, and sufficiently informed in economics and biology to hold any other proposition than we must pay the underclass to stop reproducing very soon if not immediately, and we must end all underclass immigration and reverse as much of it as possible. There is no other option other than ‘faith’.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1542126100 Timestamp) NO, I’M HONESTLY CALLY POMO’S CRIMINALS. As for dishonest, no, I am HONESTLY (Truthfully also) claiming GA like POMO is a pseudoscientific fraud for the purpose of restoring a secular cult of abrahamic equalitarianism by the same incremental techniques that were used in the ancient world to undermine the aristocracy, by the same process of selling to women in particular and the useful idiots that pursue the favor of those women, to bring about our conquest yet again by immigration and displacement. And no, there is no value in trying to recreate the levantine culture here in the west, It’s been failing for thousands of years. The chinese and the europeans had it right. BUILD WALLS. WOrse, I am claiming that the only incentive to pursue a pseudoscientific fraud is to use cunning as a weapon of coercion against those lacking sufficient agency to comprehend the consequences of the actions thus inspired. So I am honestly calling such people not just fools, but frauds, and in very real terms – criminals, in a crime against humanity. Is that over the top enough? ;)

  • (FB 1542260237 Timestamp) WESTERNERS ARE DIFFERENT – SCIENCE ERODES EQUALITARIAN

    (FB 1542260237 Timestamp) WESTERNERS ARE DIFFERENT – SCIENCE ERODES EQUALITARIAN MYTHS Twentieth-century cousin marriage rates explain more than 50 percent of variation in democracy across countries today. Political institutions vary widely around the world, yet the origin of this variation is not well understood. This study tests the hypothesis that the Catholic Church’s medieval marriage policies dissolved extended kin networks and thereby fostered inclusive institutions. In a difference-in-difference setting, I demonstrate that exposure to the Church predicts the formation of inclusive, self-governed commune cities before the year 1500CE. Moreover, within medieval Christian Europe,stricter regional and temporal cousin marriage prohibitions are likewise positively associated with communes. Strengthening this finding, I show that longer Church exposure predicts lower cousin marriage rates; in turn, lower cousin marriage rates predict higher civicness and more inclusive institutions today. These associations hold at the regional, ethnicity and country level. Twentieth-century cousin marriage rates explain more than 50 percent of variation in democracy across countries today. https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2018/11/twentieth-century-cousin-marriage-rates-explain-50-percent-variation-democracy-across-countries-today.html

    “The origins of WEIRD psychology.“ https://psyarxiv.com/d6qhu/

  • (FB 1542260237 Timestamp) WESTERNERS ARE DIFFERENT – SCIENCE ERODES EQUALITARIAN

    (FB 1542260237 Timestamp) WESTERNERS ARE DIFFERENT – SCIENCE ERODES EQUALITARIAN MYTHS Twentieth-century cousin marriage rates explain more than 50 percent of variation in democracy across countries today. Political institutions vary widely around the world, yet the origin of this variation is not well understood. This study tests the hypothesis that the Catholic Church’s medieval marriage policies dissolved extended kin networks and thereby fostered inclusive institutions. In a difference-in-difference setting, I demonstrate that exposure to the Church predicts the formation of inclusive, self-governed commune cities before the year 1500CE. Moreover, within medieval Christian Europe,stricter regional and temporal cousin marriage prohibitions are likewise positively associated with communes. Strengthening this finding, I show that longer Church exposure predicts lower cousin marriage rates; in turn, lower cousin marriage rates predict higher civicness and more inclusive institutions today. These associations hold at the regional, ethnicity and country level. Twentieth-century cousin marriage rates explain more than 50 percent of variation in democracy across countries today. https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2018/11/twentieth-century-cousin-marriage-rates-explain-50-percent-variation-democracy-across-countries-today.html

    “The origins of WEIRD psychology.“ https://psyarxiv.com/d6qhu/

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1542306429 Timestamp) THE GENETIC – DENIERS AND PLOMIN’S UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH (important sequence of arguments) There are reasons why so many people in the postwar, postmodern, feminist, and underclass movements are rigid deniers of our indifference from breeding of any other domesticated animals, and the similar differences in trait expression. We know those reasons. The fact that people believe the ‘nurture’ fallacy correlates with all other similar social cognitive biases and related fallacies, because people actively select for these falsehoods because their genes encourage and force them to. Even if confronted with the overwhelming evidence that the pseudosciences of Boas, Marx, Freud, Adorno, Derrida et all, they will admit the science but deny its application in order to defend their genetic drives. We can easily measure these differences in brain structure with female biased brains favoring this “herd-prey illusion” and male brains favoring the purely empirical “pack-hunter” bias. Evolution gave us those genetic biases for obvious reasons given the distribution of reproductive responsibilities. Genese do not exist in isolation, no, however: (a) modification of genetic disposition is endocrine and developmental it does not modify the genome (b) In the nature-nurture debate it’s 80% nature, and the rest adaptation to circumstances that FAVOR that nature. (c) Nurture can only HARM but not improve the individual (d) Education only falsifies tests but over time all of us grow into (form to) our genes. (e) The most important decision you can make for your children is who you mate with, since regression to the mean is impossible to avoid without controlled breeding (what europeans did for the past 1300 years until 1960) (f) This is contrary to mother’s instincts (they intuit everything through amplified perception because they must given the fragility of young, and high pre-modern child mortality rates) and contrary to the instincts of feminized males, but it is incontrovertible in the data. This amplified perception begins in puberty, and is the source of the overwhelmingly common female mental illness when women are not supplied with sufficient child rearing responsibilities in order to burden the cognitive-emotional load. (g) These facts are impossible for the pseudoscientists and sophists (created by Boas, Marx, Freud, Adorno, Derrida et al) in the marxist, postmodern, feminist movements to accept because it means (correctly) that: i) man was not oppressed but domesticated like every other animal and plant, and that those who are on the left are still incompletely domesticated. ii) classes are natural reflections of necessity given the abilities of the individuals to both process information and suppress animal impulses, the most common of which is gratification-delay, iii) no marxist, postmodern, feminist revolution is possible because the competence structure necessary for the preservation of human standards of living cannot tolerate any other distribution than the Pareto. iv) the optimum possible social order requires continuation of the Truth over Face of western civilization that requires we all understand our sexual, social, economic, political, and military market value (our ‘status’) is genetically determined, and that we can only create small homogenous ethnocentric polities that due to kin selection are biased to the highly redistributive. But that you are stuck with your ‘status’ at birth unless you are overwhelmingly lucky to match extreme effort with extreme luck. So no, Plomin tries very hard to mollify the Genetic-Denialist movement but the data is in and incontestable – Genetic determinism is what it is and we are no different from breeds of dogs, and the differences between individuals as well as groups is the same as the difference between breeds of animals, or in the case of great apes, that we are effectively as different a series of species as are bonobos and chimpanzees. This is totally intolerable to the feminine-marxist-postmodernist-feminist dysgenic religion of pseudoscience, sophism, and denialism, invented by boas, marx, freud, adorno, and derrida etc as a counter-revolution against Darwin, Spencer, Nietzsche, Maxwell, Poincare, and the second, german, scientific revolution. The eugenicists were right and the chinese will get there first and they will win the war – unless we end the pseudoscience, sophism, denial, and deceit of the left cult of equality.

  • (FB 1542389587 Timestamp) FOR NEWBS: UNDERSTANDING PROPERTARIANISM AS THE EXTENS

    (FB 1542389587 Timestamp) FOR NEWBS: UNDERSTANDING PROPERTARIANISM AS THE EXTENSION OF THE SCIENCES Propertarianism Consists of The Formal Logic of Natural Law: Psychology, Sociology, Politics, Group Evolutionary Strategy, as An Completion of The Laws of Nature. Originally I called it “capitalismv3” until I realized how erroneous that title was: I was doing the law, and economics only a part of it. Then I moved to calling it propertarianism. Then, once I understood what I was doing, I correctly labeled it Natural Law. The problem is that “Natural Law” has a long history of appropriation like “liberalism” and false criticism like “national socialism”. And is framed as a philosophical justification(excuse) rather than a scientific decidability (truth). And we had already built a brand around Propertarianism. So, we keep the ‘Brand’ Propertarianism for the simple reason that it was the ‘propertarians’ that I evolved the work out of, and the brand awareness is such that it’s hard to change at this point – and while it is only partially descriptive (referring to the unit of measure in psychology, sociology, ethics, politics and group strategy) , and could equally be called Testimonialism (truthful speech), or Vitruvianism or operationalism (universal system of measurement system by demonstrable human actions), or The Law of Conscious Beings (Any coopertting being must work by this set of decisions to survive), we retain Propertarianism and Natural Law out of situational convenience. , However, as this image illustrates, we have just COMPLETED the SCIENCES by expanding the scientific method into the social and psychological sciences. PROPERTARIANISM = THE NATURAL LAW. You should understand this then as the Application of the scientific method to the social sciences. and as such that we are learning a SCIENCE that will take you YEARS TO MASTER not a philosophy that you can read a book and add to your catalog of frames. PHYSICAL LAW OF TRANSFORMATION (INVOLUNTARY) EVOLVES INTO THE NATURAL LAW OF COOPERATION (VOLUNTARY) AS AN EXTENSION OF THOSE SAME LAWS. We can state these fundamental laws, Logically, Empirically, or operationally. Unfortunately, in the twentieth century, due to the ‘mathification’ of physics, and the ‘idealism’ of mathematics, due to the lack of a ‘model’, information has been LOST, that on the re-operationalizatoin of physics (undiscovered fundamental-wave, subatomic-particle, atomic, chemical, biological, sentient-cognizant, rational-calculable-computable), Psychology (Acquisitionism), Sociology (cooperation), law (decidability, organization), accounting-finance-economics (information, units of measure, measurements), is necessary to obtain the same benefits between sentient (feeling, evaluating, responding), aware (remembering, comparing), conscious (choosing), calculating (reasoning, calculating, computing) objects, as those objects that cannot detect and respond to changes in state. In other words, due to a lack of a model, the model-less-ness of mathematical idealism has worked through logic, and physics, and now into philosophy, ethics, and politics. just as theology did in the ancient world – producing similar ignorances. The Operational Movement (restoration of the model ) failed in the early part of the 20th century, and the postwar reaction against darwin (which is the model like it or not) and turing (which is the model, like it or not) because of eugenics (which is the optimum method of progression of human existence like it or not – just as was physics in the 17th-20th centuries, like it or not).

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1542306429 Timestamp) THE GENETIC – DENIERS AND PLOMIN’S UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH (important sequence of arguments) There are reasons why so many people in the postwar, postmodern, feminist, and underclass movements are rigid deniers of our indifference from breeding of any other domesticated animals, and the similar differences in trait expression. We know those reasons. The fact that people believe the ‘nurture’ fallacy correlates with all other similar social cognitive biases and related fallacies, because people actively select for these falsehoods because their genes encourage and force them to. Even if confronted with the overwhelming evidence that the pseudosciences of Boas, Marx, Freud, Adorno, Derrida et all, they will admit the science but deny its application in order to defend their genetic drives. We can easily measure these differences in brain structure with female biased brains favoring this “herd-prey illusion” and male brains favoring the purely empirical “pack-hunter” bias. Evolution gave us those genetic biases for obvious reasons given the distribution of reproductive responsibilities. Genese do not exist in isolation, no, however: (a) modification of genetic disposition is endocrine and developmental it does not modify the genome (b) In the nature-nurture debate it’s 80% nature, and the rest adaptation to circumstances that FAVOR that nature. (c) Nurture can only HARM but not improve the individual (d) Education only falsifies tests but over time all of us grow into (form to) our genes. (e) The most important decision you can make for your children is who you mate with, since regression to the mean is impossible to avoid without controlled breeding (what europeans did for the past 1300 years until 1960) (f) This is contrary to mother’s instincts (they intuit everything through amplified perception because they must given the fragility of young, and high pre-modern child mortality rates) and contrary to the instincts of feminized males, but it is incontrovertible in the data. This amplified perception begins in puberty, and is the source of the overwhelmingly common female mental illness when women are not supplied with sufficient child rearing responsibilities in order to burden the cognitive-emotional load. (g) These facts are impossible for the pseudoscientists and sophists (created by Boas, Marx, Freud, Adorno, Derrida et al) in the marxist, postmodern, feminist movements to accept because it means (correctly) that: i) man was not oppressed but domesticated like every other animal and plant, and that those who are on the left are still incompletely domesticated. ii) classes are natural reflections of necessity given the abilities of the individuals to both process information and suppress animal impulses, the most common of which is gratification-delay, iii) no marxist, postmodern, feminist revolution is possible because the competence structure necessary for the preservation of human standards of living cannot tolerate any other distribution than the Pareto. iv) the optimum possible social order requires continuation of the Truth over Face of western civilization that requires we all understand our sexual, social, economic, political, and military market value (our ‘status’) is genetically determined, and that we can only create small homogenous ethnocentric polities that due to kin selection are biased to the highly redistributive. But that you are stuck with your ‘status’ at birth unless you are overwhelmingly lucky to match extreme effort with extreme luck. So no, Plomin tries very hard to mollify the Genetic-Denialist movement but the data is in and incontestable – Genetic determinism is what it is and we are no different from breeds of dogs, and the differences between individuals as well as groups is the same as the difference between breeds of animals, or in the case of great apes, that we are effectively as different a series of species as are bonobos and chimpanzees. This is totally intolerable to the feminine-marxist-postmodernist-feminist dysgenic religion of pseudoscience, sophism, and denialism, invented by boas, marx, freud, adorno, and derrida etc as a counter-revolution against Darwin, Spencer, Nietzsche, Maxwell, Poincare, and the second, german, scientific revolution. The eugenicists were right and the chinese will get there first and they will win the war – unless we end the pseudoscience, sophism, denial, and deceit of the left cult of equality.

  • (FB 1542389587 Timestamp) FOR NEWBS: UNDERSTANDING PROPERTARIANISM AS THE EXTENS

    (FB 1542389587 Timestamp) FOR NEWBS: UNDERSTANDING PROPERTARIANISM AS THE EXTENSION OF THE SCIENCES Propertarianism Consists of The Formal Logic of Natural Law: Psychology, Sociology, Politics, Group Evolutionary Strategy, as An Completion of The Laws of Nature. Originally I called it “capitalismv3” until I realized how erroneous that title was: I was doing the law, and economics only a part of it. Then I moved to calling it propertarianism. Then, once I understood what I was doing, I correctly labeled it Natural Law. The problem is that “Natural Law” has a long history of appropriation like “liberalism” and false criticism like “national socialism”. And is framed as a philosophical justification(excuse) rather than a scientific decidability (truth). And we had already built a brand around Propertarianism. So, we keep the ‘Brand’ Propertarianism for the simple reason that it was the ‘propertarians’ that I evolved the work out of, and the brand awareness is such that it’s hard to change at this point – and while it is only partially descriptive (referring to the unit of measure in psychology, sociology, ethics, politics and group strategy) , and could equally be called Testimonialism (truthful speech), or Vitruvianism or operationalism (universal system of measurement system by demonstrable human actions), or The Law of Conscious Beings (Any coopertting being must work by this set of decisions to survive), we retain Propertarianism and Natural Law out of situational convenience. , However, as this image illustrates, we have just COMPLETED the SCIENCES by expanding the scientific method into the social and psychological sciences. PROPERTARIANISM = THE NATURAL LAW. You should understand this then as the Application of the scientific method to the social sciences. and as such that we are learning a SCIENCE that will take you YEARS TO MASTER not a philosophy that you can read a book and add to your catalog of frames. PHYSICAL LAW OF TRANSFORMATION (INVOLUNTARY) EVOLVES INTO THE NATURAL LAW OF COOPERATION (VOLUNTARY) AS AN EXTENSION OF THOSE SAME LAWS. We can state these fundamental laws, Logically, Empirically, or operationally. Unfortunately, in the twentieth century, due to the ‘mathification’ of physics, and the ‘idealism’ of mathematics, due to the lack of a ‘model’, information has been LOST, that on the re-operationalizatoin of physics (undiscovered fundamental-wave, subatomic-particle, atomic, chemical, biological, sentient-cognizant, rational-calculable-computable), Psychology (Acquisitionism), Sociology (cooperation), law (decidability, organization), accounting-finance-economics (information, units of measure, measurements), is necessary to obtain the same benefits between sentient (feeling, evaluating, responding), aware (remembering, comparing), conscious (choosing), calculating (reasoning, calculating, computing) objects, as those objects that cannot detect and respond to changes in state. In other words, due to a lack of a model, the model-less-ness of mathematical idealism has worked through logic, and physics, and now into philosophy, ethics, and politics. just as theology did in the ancient world – producing similar ignorances. The Operational Movement (restoration of the model ) failed in the early part of the 20th century, and the postwar reaction against darwin (which is the model like it or not) and turing (which is the model, like it or not) because of eugenics (which is the optimum method of progression of human existence like it or not – just as was physics in the 17th-20th centuries, like it or not).