Curt Doolittle

Theme: Science

  • YES, METAPHYSICS HAS BEEN OVERVALUED FOR 2500 YEARS (very ,very, important conce

    YES, METAPHYSICS HAS BEEN OVERVALUED FOR 2500 YEARS

    (very ,very, important concept)

    —“The athenian tradition did not account for costs.

    (1) the peerage was small and wealthy with common interests – and costs were as rude then as today”

    (2) discussion of costs immediately changes from ideals to reals thereby self selecting into class interests.” — CD

    Adam Voight asks a profound question:

    —“Does this mean that doing metaphysics has been overvalued for 2500 years?”— Adam Voight

    Yes, (which is why I piss on the subject all the time) it’s just a means of trying to find a reason not to account for costs.

    Which I think i’ve tried to state repeatedly, is that the universe operates on least cost principles because it has no choice.

    Humans do also because they have no choice. We are more complicated than the universe because we have memory, can use that memory to predict, and therefore select delayed actions or early actions an capture that difference in calories as reward.

    Measurement(math), Science (measurement), engineering (measurement), accounting/finance (measurement), economics(measurement), and Law (measurement) all account for costs.

    Philosophy and theology and the Occult do not account for costs. IMO Popper and Kuhn did not account for costs. Hayek half-succeeded and half failed, in that law is the only ‘science’ and that all else is merely some fewer number of dimensions we consider under the law. Science and philosophy and religion evolved out of law, with economics and physics the only two to account for costs, and keynesian economics an attempt like philosophy and religion to NOT account for costs.

    So here is the simple psychology of it:

    Those of us and our disciplines who account for costs.

    Those of us and our disciplines who avoid accounting for costs.

    The issue: you can rally people politically very easily by not accounting for costs.

    That is the secret to religion and philosophy versus science and law.

    Hence my work at ‘fixing’ the law such that it is a cult in and of itself, that is extremely intolerant of not accounting for costs.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-10 10:06:00 UTC

  • “PHILOSOPHY MUST BE DRAGGED OUT OF THE IVORY TOWER AND INTO THE MARKETPLACE OF I

    –“PHILOSOPHY MUST BE DRAGGED OUT OF THE IVORY TOWER AND INTO THE MARKETPLACE OF IDEAS”–

    Um. I don’t think so. Unless it has a dramatic reformation.

    via negativa, measurement, science, economics, and law, versus via positiva, philosophy, theology, occult, daydreaming.

    While I find no difference between theorizing and philosophizing that is because I do not engage in empty verbalisms or sophisms, pseudosciences, nor the magic of ignoring costs.

    Philosophy can be laundered such that philosophizing(imaginary and verbal) and theorizing (existential and actionable) are essentially identical by the use of operational language, the full accounting of costs, and a preface of the choice of goods as those of the equalitarian herd, or the hierarchical pack.

    But as practiced, and as the demotion of the discipline to a peer to theology has evidenced, measuring, theorizing, philosophizing, and theologizing are simply analogous to description, deduction, induction, abduction, and guessing, using increasingly specious excuses for one’s guesswork.

    The athenian tradition did not account for costs. There are two principle reasons for it:

    (1) the peerage was small and wealthy with common interests – and costs were as rude then as today

    (2) discussion of costs immediately changes from ideals to reals thereby self selecting into class interests

    (3) mathematical idealism influenced greco-roman thought so heavily, giving such sophism an unearned legitimacy.

    (4) historically religion spoke in these ideal terms, philosophy an improvement upon them, and empiricism an improvement upon philosophy, and science an improvement upon empiricism, just as ‘Testimonialism’ is an improvement upon science. (empiricism vs science distinguished by the 20th’s implementation of operational language, and testimonialism by the completion of the scientific method).

    It is time for philosophy to either abandon idealism, sophism, and the ignorance of costs, or to be further demoted into the theology of ideals.

    Otherwise, like theology, it cannot compete in the marketplace of ideas.

    That is what the evidence shows us.

    People ask me every single day what philosophy to read and I tell them ‘none of it’ other than perhaps the bookends of Aristotle and Nietzsche. The rest is all measurement, science, economics, Law, and history.

    There are no crimes equal to those of abraham, saul, and mohammed in the ancient world, and marx, freud, boas, in the 19th, and adorno, derrida and foucault in the 20th. We can complain about Augustine and Aquinas as apologists, but by them the damage was done.

    It is very hard to criticize archimedes, democritus, aristotle, epicurus, zeno in the ancient world, and bacon, newton, hobbes, lock, smith, hume in the modern, or poincare, maxwell, darwin, menger, pareto, spencer, nietzsche and many others in the 19th, and einstein, watson-crick, and the many others in the 20th.

    Precision of our knowledge increases thereby justifying the pack, offset by counter-revolutions in denial, sophism, pseudoscience, and supernaturalism expanding the herd. And the war between neolithic feminine dysgenic herd strategy of the levant, and the bronze age masculine eugenic pack strategy of indo europeans.

    Truth is undesirable to the many.

    —

    https://www.newstatesman.com/2019/01/philosophy-must-be-dragged-out-ivory-tower-and-marketplace-ideas?

    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-10 09:42:00 UTC

  • Yes, The Paradigm is Difficult.

    January 8th, 2019 12:34 PM [Y]es. I know the propertarian paradigm is difficult. Propertarianism = Natural Law = The completion of the scientific method = the reformation of the social sciences from pseudosciences to hard sciences = algorithmic, strictly constructed, common law of reciprocity, testimonial speech, and the warranty of due diligence of that speech = the means of constructing a scientific government = an explanation of the west’s success in the ancient and modern worlds, and the west’s survival from semitic, abrahamism. It used to be that the idea of science was as difficult as this idea of social science. Sorry. Paradigm shifts of this scale are just hard.

  • Yes, The Paradigm is Difficult.

    January 8th, 2019 12:34 PM [Y]es. I know the propertarian paradigm is difficult. Propertarianism = Natural Law = The completion of the scientific method = the reformation of the social sciences from pseudosciences to hard sciences = algorithmic, strictly constructed, common law of reciprocity, testimonial speech, and the warranty of due diligence of that speech = the means of constructing a scientific government = an explanation of the west’s success in the ancient and modern worlds, and the west’s survival from semitic, abrahamism. It used to be that the idea of science was as difficult as this idea of social science. Sorry. Paradigm shifts of this scale are just hard.

  • I know the paradigm is difficult. Propertarianism = Natural Law = The completion

    I know the paradigm is difficult.

    Propertarianism = Natural Law = The completion of the scientific method = the reformation of the social sciences from pseudosciences to hard sciences = algorithmic, strictly constructed, common law of reciprocity, testimonial speech, and the warranty of due diligence of that speech = the means of constructing a scientific government = an explanation of the west’s success in the ancient and modern worlds, and the west’s survival from semitic, abrahamism.

    It used to be that the idea of science was as difficult as this idea of social science.

    Sorry. Paradigm shifts of this scale are just hard.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-08 12:34:00 UTC

  • Um. Yes Races Exist. Sorry. No More Lies.

    Look. I don’t make mistakes. It’s my job to prosecute pseudoscience. Race denialism, is pseudoscience just, just as much as marxist economics is pseudoscience, as much as theology is pseudoscience, and just as much as postmodernism is a combination of sophism, pseudoscience, and outright denial . The importance of race may be relative but the existence of races is an observable fact which is fairly obvious from the vast differences in our skulls that equal to the differences in the identification of everything from beetles to mammals. Ergo if you say certain species and subspecies should be protected and do not say that the same applies to humans then you are simply engaging in fraud and deceit. Here is a link to the full extent of known peoples, which I update to reflect each major revision in the DNA research once or twice a year. I have not updated it for 2018 findings yet.

    https://curtdoolittle.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/the-species-of-great-apes-1.pdf

    Below is the Primate taxonomy. Taxonomy is determined by morphology (gene expression) assisting in the identification of kin groups (kin selection). In other words, morphology assists in the identification of kin, and because of kin better ability to judge the fitness of those mates. (Conversely, crossing kingroup boundaries provides the genetically UNFIT with opportunity that is not available within group. As such superior groups should logically seek to exit non-conforming members, not retain them.) The difference between races are observable at the morphological, behavioral,  aggregate behavioral, and genetic levels, but largely minor other than the fact that the size of the underclass genetic classes versus the middle genetic classes is asymmetric favoring survival under glaciation, as well as survival of winter farming, which led to greater neoteny (‘domestication’) in the far east and far west and less so in the more equatorial regions. When we notice differences between the races we are largely noticing (and reacting to) greater and lesser degrees of neotonic evolution, and when we stereotype races we are largely noticing and reacting to the sizes of the underclasses in relation tot he middle and upper. And when we measure the economic, political, social, and intellectual status of civilizations, races, and subraces, we are largely measuring the inability of groups to cull the size of the underclass sufficiently to produce a Pareto distribution capable of economic, political, social, and military competition with neighboring groups. This is the science. And any contrary argument is false, lie, and fraud. Sorry. Order:Primates Suborder:Haplorhini Infraorder:Simiiformes Family:Hominidae Subfamily:Homininae Tribe: Hominini … Genus: Pan … … Species … … … Pan Troglodytes ( Common Chimpanzee) … … … Subspecies: … … … … 1. Pan troglodytes verus … … … … 2. P. t. ellioti … … … … 3. P. t. troglodytes … … … … 4. P. t. schweinfurthii … … Species … … … Pan Paniscus (Bonobo) … Genus:Homo … … Species: … … … H. sapiens (anatomically modern humans) … … … Subspecies: … … … … H. S. Sapiens … … … … … Races: … … … … … … H. S. Africanus … … … … … … H. S. Mongoloid … … … … … … H. S. Caucasoid The question is only whether we are different races, subspecies, or species, since the definition of subspecies on down is determined by adaptation to geographic conditions and tendency for ingroup selection. Since humans are happy to attempt to ‘breed with’ (euphemistically) just about anything from dogs, to sheep to donkeys, the we have only marriage selection as an equivalent test of ingroup identification among human races. Cheers

  • Um. Yes Races Exist. Sorry. No More Lies.

    Look. I don’t make mistakes. It’s my job to prosecute pseudoscience. Race denialism, is pseudoscience just, just as much as marxist economics is pseudoscience, as much as theology is pseudoscience, and just as much as postmodernism is a combination of sophism, pseudoscience, and outright denial . The importance of race may be relative but the existence of races is an observable fact which is fairly obvious from the vast differences in our skulls that equal to the differences in the identification of everything from beetles to mammals. Ergo if you say certain species and subspecies should be protected and do not say that the same applies to humans then you are simply engaging in fraud and deceit. Here is a link to the full extent of known peoples, which I update to reflect each major revision in the DNA research once or twice a year. I have not updated it for 2018 findings yet.

    https://curtdoolittle.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/the-species-of-great-apes-3.pdf

    Below is the Primate taxonomy. Taxonomy is determined by morphology (gene expression) assisting in the identification of kin groups (kin selection). In other words, morphology assists in the identification of kin, and because of kin better ability to judge the fitness of those mates. (Conversely, crossing kingroup boundaries provides the genetically UNFIT with opportunity that is not available within group. As such superior groups should logically seek to exit non-conforming members, not retain them.) The difference between races are observable at the morphological, behavioral,  aggregate behavioral, and genetic levels, but largely minor other than the fact that the size of the underclass genetic classes versus the middle genetic classes is asymmetric favoring survival under glaciation, as well as survival of winter farming, which led to greater neoteny (‘domestication’) in the far east and far west and less so in the more equatorial regions. When we notice differences between the races we are largely noticing (and reacting to) greater and lesser degrees of neotonic evolution, and when we stereotype races we are largely noticing and reacting to the sizes of the underclasses in relation tot he middle and upper. And when we measure the economic, political, social, and intellectual status of civilizations, races, and subraces, we are largely measuring the inability of groups to cull the size of the underclass sufficiently to produce a Pareto distribution capable of economic, political, social, and military competition with neighboring groups. This is the science. And any contrary argument is false, lie, and fraud. Sorry. Order:Primates Suborder:Haplorhini Infraorder:Simiiformes Family:Hominidae Subfamily:Homininae Tribe: Hominini … Genus: Pan … … Species … … … Pan Troglodytes ( Common Chimpanzee) … … … Subspecies: … … … … 1. Pan troglodytes verus … … … … 2. P. t. ellioti … … … … 3. P. t. troglodytes … … … … 4. P. t. schweinfurthii … … Species … … … Pan Paniscus (Bonobo) … Genus:Homo … … Species: … … … H. sapiens (anatomically modern humans) … … … Subspecies: … … … … H. S. Sapiens … … … … … Races: … … … … … … H. S. Africanus … … … … … … H. S. Mongoloid … … … … … … H. S. Caucasoid The question is only whether we are different races, subspecies, or species, since the definition of subspecies on down is determined by adaptation to geographic conditions and tendency for ingroup selection. Since humans are happy to attempt to ‘breed with’ (euphemistically) just about anything from dogs, to sheep to donkeys, the we have only marriage selection as an equivalent test of ingroup identification among human races. Cheers

  • I can explain the current competing theories of dark matter, explain the underly

    I can explain the current competing theories of dark matter, explain the underlying problem fairly simply, the foundations of mathematics,d provide an explanation for the failure of 20th century economics and philosophy and a thousand other things that are over your head. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-03 17:28:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1080878634804621312

    Reply addressees: @Victori00820164 @lion__noir @Adrianmoore528 @SomeMoreNews

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1080875388845182976

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1080875388845182976

  • I am probably three standard deviations above you dear. I do science. That’s why

    I am probably three standard deviations above you dear. I do science. That’s why your folk are afraid of me. Because science unlike Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism doesn’t lie. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-03 17:12:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1080874661561417728

    Reply addressees: @Victori00820164 @lion__noir @Adrianmoore528 @SomeMoreNews

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1080873891235393537

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1080873891235393537

  • Untitled

    Surprise Discovery Reveals Second Visual System in Cerebral Cortex: Mouse Study

    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-03 16:59:00 UTC