Theme: Science

  • COUPLES THERAPY (almost) NEVER WORKS: Dr. Orion Taraban (@OrionTaraban) is “The

    COUPLES THERAPY (almost) NEVER WORKS:

    Dr. Orion Taraban (@OrionTaraban) is “The Go-To Guy” in the Psychology of Relationships. Science without bias or propanda. Specializes in working with men.

    TAKES:
    “You Are Not The Client” … the relationship is in couple’s therapy. So get your own therapy.
    “You’re likely in a relationship with an emotional terrorist, but you’r the reason you are.”
    “It’s not wise to negotiate with terrorists”
    “Appeasement doesn’t work”
    “Find someone else whose selfishness you can live with.”

    https://t.co/n9k3dkbZSf


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-15 17:07:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1735708251872763904

  • Not sure where you get that from. Possibly a picture of a guy she was dating yea

    Not sure where you get that from. Possibly a picture of a guy she was dating years ago. She is married to a fellow scientist. And both of them are better, smarter, more accomplished people than you are – as well as any circle of relationships that would tolerate your infantile…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-15 00:01:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1735449879441285427

    Reply addressees: @realrenergy @dicktoles88 @Areez22 @GRACE__O_MALLEY @NatLawInstitute

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1735438133758488808

  • Not sure where you get that from. Possibly a picture of a guy she was dating yea

    Not sure where you get that from. Possibly a picture of a guy she was dating years ago. She is married to a fellow scientist. And both of them are better, smarter, more accomplished people than you are – as well as any circle of relationships that would tolerate your infantile presence. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-15 00:01:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1735449879361503232

  • Word game. IN the current scientific literature the term is ‘agency’. In the ent

    Word game. IN the current scientific literature the term is ‘agency’. In the entire history of the word power, as far as I know, at least in the past two centuries, it’s been ‘the capacity to alter the probability of outcomes.”

    So when you made your claim it’s all about power this was as is common an ambiguous statement, because to nearly anyone with any education in law political theory or history power means ‘coercion’. And Nietzche’s ethics can be easily interpreted (and often are) to state that power and coerciove power are heroic rather than immoral.

    Reply addressees: @radiofreenw


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-13 18:14:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1735000285053927424

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1734994000761999785

  • RT @ThruTheHayes: THE SCIENCE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION You can understand the sci

    RT @ThruTheHayes: THE SCIENCE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION

    You can understand the sciences necessary to have trust in your actions and one-anot…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-12 09:53:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1734511803395105012

  • James Lindsay’s Suggestion for Academic Incentives Note: Given that the term sci

    James Lindsay’s Suggestion for Academic Incentives
    Note: Given that the term science is simply an application of legal testimony, our organization’s proposal is the same regardless of context, which is to use the courts to punish those who publish other than testifiable testimony (science) as doing harm to the public commons of information. This includes charges of sedition against the constitution of natural, common, concurrent law. This (a) causes academic insurance (b) creates a network outside of the academy – which will logically consist of retired academics – that profits from ‘clearing’ the academy of bias and deceit.

    LINDSAY”S SOLUTION
    via James Lindsay @ConceptualJames
    The holy has to be defended from the profane. In a Classically Liberal system that doesn’t mean existing knowledge cannot be questioned, but it does mean it has to resist subversion. Good-faith criticism and bad-faith criticism (ruthless critique) have to be distinguished.

    Academics might not even be equipped for this job, to be honest, but that made them poor guardians of the effective heart of the systems depending on their charge. We’re paying the price for this now and trying to salvage what we can before the library is burned.

    If you’re going to be the high priests of the canon of knowledge, you had damned well better be able to protect that canon’s integrity. Various incentive structures, specialization, etc., led to the academic goal being merely to ADD TO the canon of knowledge. But who defends it?

    There is actually a simple structural reform to this that is clearly necessary. Rather than granting PhDs, tenure, advancement, glory, etc., to academics merely for doing “new” research, academia must start elevating people who successfully do academic cleanup, rigorously.

    There’s a key difference between a Magisterium, which checks against orthodoxy, and what I’m saying here, though. Academia is already a poisoned Mystical Magisterium of Social Gnosticism. That’s rigor according to rationality and especially skepticism (checking against evidence).

    The Library, to use the metaphor, almost deserves to be burned because it’s rotted through with parasitical pseudo-knowledge, critical magick, outright corruption, and nonsense posing as profundity, but there’s too much wheat to burn it all as chaff. This is important.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-11 17:22:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1734262451850342400

  • Q: Curt: Isn’t classical liberalism anti-scientific?) Classical Liberalism, an e

    Q: Curt: Isn’t classical liberalism anti-scientific?)

    Classical Liberalism, an evolution of anglo saxon culture and norman administration, was invented by enland and implemented by the USA with its written constitution and is the most scientific government ever produced by man. (markets calculate, all american is common constitution and law under that constitutino at least prior to the 1960s is therefore scientific). Instead, if you mean Christian optimism has been anti-scientific because of the failures of the limits of that system then that would be true.

    But classical liberals were as likely to be in the skeptical class (hobbs, hamilton, ) as they were in the optimistic class (locke, jefferson). They weren’t of a single mind. At the time of the ascent of the british empire and the american continent the optimism was perhaps warranted as it allowed maximization of the then-set of opportunities.

    We have of course exhausted those opportunities, and found that the inclusion of the feminine (jews, muslims, women) in to the economy and polity, as well as, possibly, the lower classes and immigrants, that these people resist the western germanic anglo american demand for individual responsibility for private and common. Women will avoid responsibilty at all costs, even responsibilty for truth before face. This is enabling of all the rent seekers and parasites that are antithetical to western civilization.

    Americans, especially the anglos, were seeking to leave behind ‘the parsitism and corruption of the aristocracy, the church, and the peasantry. And the new england colonies were for all intents and purposes eugenicists. Which is why the progressive movement and eugenics movement evolved out of the north.

    That’s despite that the south is the reserve of aristocratic character and perhaps, just as the USA is the most western of western civilization, the south was the most anglo-saxon of the americans and most western of the western nations.

    Which is interesting given that today the south is the reserve of western civilization, reserve of rule of law of natura law, and the reserve of christianity. Meanwhile the north – in no small part to catholic displacement of protestants, but retention of protestant academic institutions and laws, and has become, especially after the jewish migration post war into NY and the NE, the center of irresponsibility (leftism), and california (due to migratory patterns) the geography where leftism was most easily advanced, im posed, and now destroys western civilization despite the geographic utility of the california coast.

    Cheers.

    Reply addressees: @OooBardam


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-11 16:41:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1734252176896126978

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1734216542617776514

  • (Thoughts on Intellectual Decline) The postwar academy was bad enough. We lost t

    (Thoughts on Intellectual Decline)
    The postwar academy was bad enough. We lost the ability to conduct social science rather early – during the world wars. We lost the ability to think scientifically by the capture of the academy by the jewish left. And we lost the ability to…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-11 13:24:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1734202577321861560

  • (Thoughts on Intellectual Decline) The postwar academy was bad enough. We lost t

    (Thoughts on Intellectual Decline)
    The postwar academy was bad enough. We lost the ability to conduct social science rather early – during the world wars. We lost the ability to think scientifically by the capture of the academy by the jewish left. And we lost the ability to speak the truth with the capture of the academy by women. As a consequence we are losing the capacity to think and reason as well as speak the truth before face.

    I’m listening to a late eighties interview of an influential scholar at Cambridge. And I’ve listened to and read Bertrand Russell for example. And while Russell is quite silly in many ways, he is a solid thinker. Of course I consider myself a product of Darwin, Hayek, Popper, Becker, and Turing. Though we should give credit to Aquinas, Bacon and Occam in their generation and Smith-Hume-Blackstone in theirs, as much as Darwin, Spencer, Nietzche, Maxwell in theirs. But otherwise, outside of genetics, medicine, and tech, we have seen nearly all thought in the behavioral sciences (other than some aspects of economics), result in error, bias, and fraud.

    So, it’s become increasingly clear that (a) classical liberalism = being english, and (b) scientific thought = being english. The degree to which these genetics culture institutions and systems of thought are related is not something we were terribly happy in the postwar period to imagine. Even if it was considered obvious pre-war.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-11 13:24:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1734202577175162880

  • RT @WalterIII: @elonmusk @DavidSacks Science is divided from pseudoscience by on

    RT @WalterIII: @elonmusk @DavidSacks Science is divided from pseudoscience by one question: Is the theory testable? If its not testable th…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-12-11 10:29:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1734158496533225741