Curt Doolittle

Theme: Science

  • PROPERTARIANISM IS A BIT LIKE STUDYING FOR A STEM+L DEGREE. THAT’S WHY IT TAKES

    https://propertarianism.com/basic-concepts/UNDERSTANDING PROPERTARIANISM IS A BIT LIKE STUDYING FOR A STEM+L DEGREE. THAT’S WHY IT TAKES TIME. IT’S NON-TRIVIAL.

    —“I’m having a hard time understanding propertarianism tbh. I’m reading your articles on the website but still….what should I do?:— Ayham Nedal

    Our Reading List helps with general knowledge so that you can tell we know what we’re talking about. Propertarianism consists of a broad set of concepts that produce a logic and science of social science in all its uses. We draw terms and ideas from math to logic to philosophy to law to economics to the sciences. And it’s because we do so, that we were able to UNITE THE SCIENCES into a SINGLE LANGUAGE consistent across all of them, thereby eliminating the silos, and allowing us to identify the falsehoods or imprecisions in each of them.

    So we include books on every major subject in social science.

    The Introductions to Propertarianism are very helpful. They are:

    The CONCEPTS:

    1) https://propertarianism.com/basic-concepts/

    (Which I should fill out a bit more if I get some time)

    AND

    THE CORE

    2) https://propertarianism.com/2016/01/05/an-overview-of-propertarianism-for-serious-newbies/

    Libertarianism (Mises, Hayek, Haslitt, Rothbard, Hoppe), tried very hard to unite social science, economics, law, and politics but they were not successful. However, if you understand libertarianism, Ely Harman’s introduction is very helpful in helping with the transition.

    We probably should write a transition document for the Dark Enlightenment folk (Moldbug), and for Classical Liberals, and for Fascists. But we have only so much time….

    HISTORY

    The cycles of history, and the competition between the Western (Science/Law), Asian (military/political), and Semitic (Religion,Mythology), is something almost anyone can understand. The secret to the west is easy to understand (computational velocity by sovereignty, reciprocity, natural law, markets in everything)..

    MANKIND

    The Acquisitionism (psychology), Propertarianism (ethics), and the Class System, and Perfect Government, are not difficult. but require learning some precise terms. This is harder than it should be in my opinion and I don’t know why it’s difficult. It’s just training yourself to categorize by property rather than moral norms.

    LOGIC

    Testimonialism (grammars, logic, scientific speech, and the geometry of meaning) is extremely challenging if you do not have experience in philosophy of science, math, and logic. and writing arguments in natural law (balanced transactions) takes quite a bit of practice. This is hard. But, it’s the entire basis of the program. Because it is the completion of the scientifc method that’s based upon testimonialism, and our ability to suppress fraud and deceit in the commons (political speech) is dependent upon encoding Testimonialism (a checklist of due diligences) into the law.

    IT’S BIG

    This is a bigger scope of work than Marxism. So we cover the entire spectrum of metaphysics, psychology, testimony (truth), ethics, sociology, politics, law, group evolutionary strategy, and war.

    Lastly, just ASK US. if I don’t answer, someone else will.

    We KNOW that we have to make a course for it. The course outline is already on the site. But without the book(s) it is not going to be easily taught. So everyone (me included) is waiting on me to finish – and it’s killing me…. lol.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-21 12:35:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0020835https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0020835

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-20 18:39:00 UTC

  • “How Can I Learn Why Psychology Is a Pseudoscience?”

    October 20th, 2018 10:34 AM

    —“CURT: HOW CAN I LEARN WHY PSYCHOLOGY IS A PSEUDOSCIENCE?”— A Friend

    [H]mmm…. Well, psychology(Investigation/measurement) vs freudian psychology(projection/fictionalism). Start at the beginning with Karl Popper on Freud. The read about the “Operationist” movement in psychology. Then read about “The replication crisis”. Then take note of how hard it is to find any papers that do not try to deny psychology is a pseudoscience despite the near zero replicability of findings. “The Ladies Doth Protest Too Much” is rather obvious. Data is data. Replication is replication. Psychology and sociology don’t replicate. Ergo, it’s not science. Freudian categories are outright fabrications – he just made it up. Why? We all carry our cultural baggage with us. Judaism enforces conformity with the feminine bias (entrapment/herd) and europeanism encourages exceptionalism (innovation/pack). Freud stated the jewish and feminine psychology in pseudoscientific terms, (he basically invented the concept of ‘rape culture’ that is a psychosis of the feminine mind). Nietzsche stated the european and masculine psychology casting the feminine as a catastrophe (correctly). Just as Marx was a Jewish reaction to Darwin, Freud was a Jewish reaction to Nietzsche, Frankfurt was a Jewish Reaction to Spencer et al. Jung came along and tried to correct Freud by using literary archetypes, which were free of Jewish/Feminine psychosis, and provided a normative model compared to Nietzsche’s reformation and restoration of western civilization. The war period resulted in pseudoscience through about the Regan Revolution of the 1980s, and the technological revolution and fall of the soviet and chinese empires in the 1990’s. As usual, science (empiricism, and warranty of due diligence) saved us from nonsense. Psychotherapy is a pseudoscience (talk therapy), although counseling (mentoring) is not. Cognitive behavior therapy (training) is not a pseudoscience, it is just stoicism applied correctively rather than as an ordinary universal training of the mind. Psychiatry (medication and surgery) is not a pseudoscience and it was the first strike against the pseudosciences of the Freudians. Psychology isn’t always a pseudoscience – but is mostly – because only economics provides us with good data on human behavior (demonstrated preference and bias). The fact that we cannot actually run experiments in economics is precisely the reason we have a harder time projecting, and that economic pseudoscience is largely achieved by innumeracy: cherry picking the income statement over the balance sheet in order to hide destruction of accumulated capital. Cog Sci is not really a term used any longer, but represented an attempt by a GENERATION of scholars to LEAVE the pseudoscience of psychology behind. It was made possible largely by imaging and computer imaging technology which let us examine (relatively un-intrusively) the workings of the brain. And we have made huge progress in the past twenty years in exposing psychology (projectionism) as a pseudoscience. And replaced it with subfields that study language, cognitive bias, emotions, neurology, brain structure, etc without the ‘projection’ (fantasizing) that constituted psychology. Propertarianism/Acquisitionism provide a superior means of describing behavior (incentives, biases, and actions). This is why it’s so important a vocabulary and grammar for metaphysics, psychology, social science, politics, and law. Curt

  • “How Can I Learn Why Psychology Is a Pseudoscience?”

    October 20th, 2018 10:34 AM

    —“CURT: HOW CAN I LEARN WHY PSYCHOLOGY IS A PSEUDOSCIENCE?”— A Friend

    [H]mmm…. Well, psychology(Investigation/measurement) vs freudian psychology(projection/fictionalism). Start at the beginning with Karl Popper on Freud. The read about the “Operationist” movement in psychology. Then read about “The replication crisis”. Then take note of how hard it is to find any papers that do not try to deny psychology is a pseudoscience despite the near zero replicability of findings. “The Ladies Doth Protest Too Much” is rather obvious. Data is data. Replication is replication. Psychology and sociology don’t replicate. Ergo, it’s not science. Freudian categories are outright fabrications – he just made it up. Why? We all carry our cultural baggage with us. Judaism enforces conformity with the feminine bias (entrapment/herd) and europeanism encourages exceptionalism (innovation/pack). Freud stated the jewish and feminine psychology in pseudoscientific terms, (he basically invented the concept of ‘rape culture’ that is a psychosis of the feminine mind). Nietzsche stated the european and masculine psychology casting the feminine as a catastrophe (correctly). Just as Marx was a Jewish reaction to Darwin, Freud was a Jewish reaction to Nietzsche, Frankfurt was a Jewish Reaction to Spencer et al. Jung came along and tried to correct Freud by using literary archetypes, which were free of Jewish/Feminine psychosis, and provided a normative model compared to Nietzsche’s reformation and restoration of western civilization. The war period resulted in pseudoscience through about the Regan Revolution of the 1980s, and the technological revolution and fall of the soviet and chinese empires in the 1990’s. As usual, science (empiricism, and warranty of due diligence) saved us from nonsense. Psychotherapy is a pseudoscience (talk therapy), although counseling (mentoring) is not. Cognitive behavior therapy (training) is not a pseudoscience, it is just stoicism applied correctively rather than as an ordinary universal training of the mind. Psychiatry (medication and surgery) is not a pseudoscience and it was the first strike against the pseudosciences of the Freudians. Psychology isn’t always a pseudoscience – but is mostly – because only economics provides us with good data on human behavior (demonstrated preference and bias). The fact that we cannot actually run experiments in economics is precisely the reason we have a harder time projecting, and that economic pseudoscience is largely achieved by innumeracy: cherry picking the income statement over the balance sheet in order to hide destruction of accumulated capital. Cog Sci is not really a term used any longer, but represented an attempt by a GENERATION of scholars to LEAVE the pseudoscience of psychology behind. It was made possible largely by imaging and computer imaging technology which let us examine (relatively un-intrusively) the workings of the brain. And we have made huge progress in the past twenty years in exposing psychology (projectionism) as a pseudoscience. And replaced it with subfields that study language, cognitive bias, emotions, neurology, brain structure, etc without the ‘projection’ (fantasizing) that constituted psychology. Propertarianism/Acquisitionism provide a superior means of describing behavior (incentives, biases, and actions). This is why it’s so important a vocabulary and grammar for metaphysics, psychology, social science, politics, and law. Curt

  • Comparison of Male and Female Adults with High Functioning Autism Spectrum Conditions

    October 20th, 2018 6:39 PM A Behavioral Comparison of Male and Female Adults with High Functioning Autism Spectrum Conditions Meng-Chuan Lai , Michael V. Lombardo, Greg Pasco, Amber N. V. Ruigrok, Sally J. Wheelwright, Susan A. Sadek, Bhismadev Chakrabarti, MRC AIMS Consortium , Simon Baron-Cohen Published: June 13, 2011 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020835 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0020835 Abstract Autism spectrum conditions (ASC) affect more males than females in the general population. However, within ASC it is unclear if there are phenotypic sex differences. Testing for similarities and differences between the sexes is important not only for clinical assessment but also has implications for theories of typical sex differences and of autism. Using cognitive and behavioral measures, we investigated similarities and differences between the sexes in age- and IQ-matched adults with ASC (high-functioning autism or Asperger syndrome). Of the 83 (45 males and 38 females) participants, 62 (33 males and 29 females) met Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) cut-off criteria for autism in childhood and were included in all subsequent analyses. The severity of childhood core autism symptoms did not differ between the sexes. Males and females also did not differ in self-reported empathy, systemizing, anxiety, depression, and obsessive-compulsive traits/symptoms or mentalizing performance. However, adult females with ASC showed more lifetime sensory symptoms (p = 0.036), fewer current socio-communication difficulties (p = 0.001), and more self-reported autistic traits (p = 0.012) than males. In addition, females with ASC who also had developmental language delay had lower current performance IQ than those without developmental language delay (p<0.001), a pattern not seen in males. The absence of typical sex differences in empathizing-systemizing profiles within the autism spectrum confirms a prediction from the extreme male brain theory. Behavioral sex differences within ASC may also reflect different developmental mechanisms between males and females with ASC. We discuss the importance of the superficially better socio-communication ability in adult females with ASC in terms of why females with ASC may more often go under-recognized, and receive their diagnosis later, than males.

  • Comparison of Male and Female Adults with High Functioning Autism Spectrum Conditions

    October 20th, 2018 6:39 PM A Behavioral Comparison of Male and Female Adults with High Functioning Autism Spectrum Conditions Meng-Chuan Lai , Michael V. Lombardo, Greg Pasco, Amber N. V. Ruigrok, Sally J. Wheelwright, Susan A. Sadek, Bhismadev Chakrabarti, MRC AIMS Consortium , Simon Baron-Cohen Published: June 13, 2011 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020835 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0020835 Abstract Autism spectrum conditions (ASC) affect more males than females in the general population. However, within ASC it is unclear if there are phenotypic sex differences. Testing for similarities and differences between the sexes is important not only for clinical assessment but also has implications for theories of typical sex differences and of autism. Using cognitive and behavioral measures, we investigated similarities and differences between the sexes in age- and IQ-matched adults with ASC (high-functioning autism or Asperger syndrome). Of the 83 (45 males and 38 females) participants, 62 (33 males and 29 females) met Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R) cut-off criteria for autism in childhood and were included in all subsequent analyses. The severity of childhood core autism symptoms did not differ between the sexes. Males and females also did not differ in self-reported empathy, systemizing, anxiety, depression, and obsessive-compulsive traits/symptoms or mentalizing performance. However, adult females with ASC showed more lifetime sensory symptoms (p = 0.036), fewer current socio-communication difficulties (p = 0.001), and more self-reported autistic traits (p = 0.012) than males. In addition, females with ASC who also had developmental language delay had lower current performance IQ than those without developmental language delay (p<0.001), a pattern not seen in males. The absence of typical sex differences in empathizing-systemizing profiles within the autism spectrum confirms a prediction from the extreme male brain theory. Behavioral sex differences within ASC may also reflect different developmental mechanisms between males and females with ASC. We discuss the importance of the superficially better socio-communication ability in adult females with ASC in terms of why females with ASC may more often go under-recognized, and receive their diagnosis later, than males.

  • “CURT: HOW CAN I LEARN WHY PSYCHOLOGY IS A PSEUDOSCIENCE?”— A Friend Hmmm….

    —“CURT: HOW CAN I LEARN WHY PSYCHOLOGY IS A PSEUDOSCIENCE?”— A Friend

    Hmmm…. Well, psychology(Investigation/measurement) vs freudian psychology(projection/fictionalism).

    Start at the beginning with Karl Popper on Freud.

    The read about the “Operationist” movement in psychology.

    Then read about “The replication crisis”.

    Then take note of how hard it is to find any papers that do not try to deny psychology is a pseudoscience despite the near zero replicability of findings. “The Ladies Doth Protest Too Much” is rather obvious. Data is data. Replication is replication. Psychology and sociology don’t replicate. Ergo, it’s not science.

    Freudian categories are outright fabrications – he just made it up. Why? We all carry our cultural baggage with us. Judaism enforces conformity with the feminine bias (entrapment/herd) and europeanism encourages exceptionalism (innovation/pack). Freud stated the jewish and feminine psychology in pseudoscientific terms, (he basically invented the concept of ‘rape culture’ that is a psychosis of the feminine mind).

    Nietzsche stated the european and masculine psychology casting the feminine as a catastrophe (correctly). Just as Marx was a Jewish reaction to Darwin, Freud was a Jewish reaction to Nietzsche, Frankfurt was a Jewish Reaction to Spencer et al.

    Jung came along and tried to correct Freud by using literary archetypes, which were free of Jewish/Feminine psychosis, and provided a normative model compared to Nietzsche’s reformation and restoration of western civilization.

    The war period resulted in pseudoscience through about the Regan Revolution of the 1980s, and the technological revolution and fall of the soviet and chinese empires in the 1990’s.

    As usual, science (empiricism, and warranty of due diligence) saved us from nonsense.

    Psychotherapy is a pseudoscience (talk therapy), although counseling (mentoring) is not.

    Cognitive behavior therapy (training) is not a pseudoscience, it is just stoicism applied correctively rather than as an ordinary universal training of the mind.

    Psychiatry (medication and surgery) is not a pseudoscience and it was the first strike against the pseudosciences of the Freudians.

    Psychology isn’t always a pseudoscience – but is mostly – because only economics provides us with good data on human behavior (demonstrated preference and bias). The fact that we cannot actually run experiments in economics is precisely the reason we have a harder time projecting, and that economic pseudoscience is largely achieved by innumeracy: cherry picking the income statement over the balance sheet in order to hide destruction of accumulated capital.

    Cog Sci is not really a term used any longer, but represented an attempt by a GENERATION of scholars to LEAVE the pseudoscience of psychology behind. It was made possible largely by imaging and computer imaging technology which let us examine (relatively un-intrusively) the workings of the brain. And we have made huge progress in the past twenty years in exposing psychology (projectionism) as a pseudoscience. And replaced it with subfields that study language, cognitive bias, emotions, neurology, brain structure, etc without the ‘projection’ (fantasizing) that constituted psychology.

    Propertarianism/Acquisitionism provide a superior means of describing behavior (incentives, biases, and actions). This is why it’s so important a vocabulary and grammar for metaphysics, psychology, social science, politics, and law.

    Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-20 10:34:00 UTC

  • RT @DegenRolf: Widely touted psychology study, finding, in essence, that the ric

    RT @DegenRolf: Widely touted psychology study, finding, in essence, that the rich are jerks, fails to replicate. https://www.collabra.org/articles/10.1525/collabra.166/ h…

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-20 00:47:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1053447694813970432

  • IMO: this is because we have failed to produce a value neutral science (vocabula

    IMO: this is because we have failed to produce a value neutral science (vocabulary) of cooperation, and freud, boaz and marx dug a rhetorical hole we haven’t (yet) dug out of.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-20 00:47:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1053447612525932544

    Reply addressees: @JonHaidt @kaidi_wu

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1053302159993913344

    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/1053302159993913344

  • The Spectrum of Interpretability (error)

    October 19th, 2018 7:28 AM THE SPECTRUM OF INTERPRETABILITY (ERROR) [T]hus the problem of literature vs philosophy, vs science vs mathematics : a decline in ‘interpretation’ due to the increasing precision of the vocabulary and grammar. Unfortunately humans (children) are most accessible and suggestible at the left of that scale, and least suggestible but least accessible at the right. || LIterary analogy > rational philosophy > economics > cognitive science > physics > mathematics.