Theme: Science

  • ON THE PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC ACADEMY’S SPECIALIZATION I think Group Evolutionary Stra

    ON THE PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC ACADEMY’S SPECIALIZATION

    I think Group Evolutionary Strategy is an empirical science.

    I think Political Orders (informal and formal institutions) evolve to facilitate group evolutionary strategies.

    I think all groups demonstrate a individual productivity, the production of reproduction (families), the production of goods and services, the production of commons, and the production of group evolutionary strategy in competition against other groups.

    I think formal (institutional) economics studies one form of the three methods of influence: invention, investment, production distribution, trade, and consumption. And that this discipline studies largely the production of commons.

    I think economics does not study the two other (necessary) methods of organizing human behavior: threat/force/law, and threat/exclusion/religion-myth-narrative-ideology. The three threats of deprivation are threat of harm, threat of loss of consumption, threat of loss of cooperation.

    I think studying any set of formal or inform institutions in isolation leads to selection bias, confirmation bias.

    I think economics, like democratic secular humanism, like individualism over familialism, like consumption over group competitiveness is providing a destructive influence on western civilization and is more responsible for the decline in the institutions of western civilization than feminism, more than socialism, and is second only to mass immigration in the damage done.

    One can construct a pseudoscience by failing to follow the scientific method, yet claiming that one does. However, one can also construct a pseudoscience by not understanding the scientific method (laundering imaginary relations, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, overloading, and deceit) and failing to apply ALL its methods of preventing error bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, overloading, and deceit.

    The scientific method requires we test for:

    categorical consistency, logical consistency, empirical consistency, existential possibility (operationalism), full accounting, parsimony and limits, and in human affairs, morality: fully informed, productive, warrantied, voluntary transfer under which cooperation is rational and non parasitic.

    The scientific method, much like the broken window fallacy, requires full accounting as a defense against demonstrating confirmation bias by the use of selection bias.

    And therefore by not accounting for the changes in all forms of capital, including genetic, normative, familial, institutional, informational, economics simplifies the craft, and avoids full accounting, justifies consumption, and encourages the rapid destruction of genetic, normative, familial, institutional, and informational capital.

    If a man ever says “but in economics we only study …” you have just seen a man engage in pseudoscience, just as much as a priest or mystic says “i only study the words of…” There is no difference.

    Ergo I think that economics is a study of a subset of cooperation under the (false, unscientific, pseudoscientific) assumption that consumption is a ‘good’ rather than group competitiveness is a good. And I think economics (including those advocating liberty) has been complicity in the destruction of western group evolutionary strategy.

    Why? I think coming to terms (as I have) with western group evolutionary strategy confirms the empirical basis of western civilization, but I also think that coming to terms with western group evolutionary strategy eliminates our ability to engage in that most (despicable) form of fraud: unearned virtue-signaling, which the academy and state so depend upon for mass support.

    The west succeeded in developing faster than all other groups by upward redistribution of reproduction and the constant and relentless domestication of the underclasses through hanging, war, manorialism, and starvation.

    The entry of women into the workforce and into the franchise reversed this strategy.

    That is social science: group evolutionary strategy. Everything else is pseudoscience. And must be.

    Curt Doolittle


    Source date (UTC): 2016-04-11 02:31:00 UTC

  • No More Lies. A century of leftist pseudoscience is ended. Boaz, Marx, Freud, Ca

    No More Lies. A century of leftist pseudoscience is ended. Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor, Mises, Keynes, Frankfurt School.#NewRight


    Source date (UTC): 2016-04-10 07:25:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/719063778646757376

    Reply addressees: @70torinoman

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/719051983097700352


    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/719051983097700352

  • Because specialized knowledge is often counter-intuitive, professionals in a dis

    Because specialized knowledge is often counter-intuitive, professionals in a discipline overestimate their understanding. This is why economists can only give opinions on very narrow specializations within their craft.

    Because of the inescapable effect of anchoring, specialists rapidly decline in predictive ability over random surveys of the general population on matters of public behavior.

    The general public is a constant victim of overestimating their understanding, and display pervasive dunning-kruger effects. Meanwhile specialists underestimate their understanding for the same reason.

    While each individual in the general public is demonstrably an idiot about almost everything, enough of the general public grasps his state of affairs well enough to bias the survey of the public opinion toward a more accurate prediction than that of specialists.

    In other words, a lot of people tend to be more right than a few people when it comes to general things, and specialists tend to be right about very specific things, and everyone in between is pretty much useless.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-04-10 04:36:00 UTC

  • NO MORE PSEUDOSCIENCE. NO MORE LIES. NO MORE PROPAGANDA. NO MORE SUPPRESSION OF

    NO MORE PSEUDOSCIENCE. NO MORE LIES. NO MORE PROPAGANDA. NO MORE SUPPRESSION OF THE TRUTH.

    Rule or be ruled.

    Truth is enough.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-04-10 03:27:00 UTC

  • Still Stuck with the Success of the German Literary over the Anglo Analytic

    [I] am still stuck with the problem : 1) THE THREE CITIES a) The anglos had the right language mode (science), the right political model (rule of law common law), the right commons model (market for commons) but the wrong theory of man (equality),.

    b) the germans had the wrong language model (literary rationalism), a typical political model (bibartate continental law), a typical commons model (decision by professional bureaucracy), and the right theory of man (hierarchy). c) the jews had the wrong language model (legalistic pseudoscience), political model (propaganda), commons model (none), and the wrong theory of man (separatism) 2) THE PEDAGOGICAL VS THE DECIDABLE The german model is one of regulation for the prevention of conflicts at the expense of innovation. The american is one of dispute resolution for the preservation of liberty in experimentation. The german model of man is empirical while the anglo model is ideological – a superior german transition from aristocracy to bureaucracy. The german model is pedagogical an literary (literary philosophy), and the anglo model is anti-pedagogical, and limited to dispute resolution.. The german model is to seek rational optimums while the american model is to use competition to discover optimums. 3) THE SUCCESS OF THE PEDAGOGICAL OVER THE DECIDABLE What troubles me is the success of the pedagogical german model in contrast to decidable anglo model. I am an anglo analytic philosopher. I know my function. But does that mean other authors will have to create pedagogical models of my work and that it is THEY who will be successful and not I?
  • Still Stuck with the Success of the German Literary over the Anglo Analytic

    [I] am still stuck with the problem : 1) THE THREE CITIES a) The anglos had the right language mode (science), the right political model (rule of law common law), the right commons model (market for commons) but the wrong theory of man (equality),.

    b) the germans had the wrong language model (literary rationalism), a typical political model (bibartate continental law), a typical commons model (decision by professional bureaucracy), and the right theory of man (hierarchy). c) the jews had the wrong language model (legalistic pseudoscience), political model (propaganda), commons model (none), and the wrong theory of man (separatism) 2) THE PEDAGOGICAL VS THE DECIDABLE The german model is one of regulation for the prevention of conflicts at the expense of innovation. The american is one of dispute resolution for the preservation of liberty in experimentation. The german model of man is empirical while the anglo model is ideological – a superior german transition from aristocracy to bureaucracy. The german model is pedagogical an literary (literary philosophy), and the anglo model is anti-pedagogical, and limited to dispute resolution.. The german model is to seek rational optimums while the american model is to use competition to discover optimums. 3) THE SUCCESS OF THE PEDAGOGICAL OVER THE DECIDABLE What troubles me is the success of the pedagogical german model in contrast to decidable anglo model. I am an anglo analytic philosopher. I know my function. But does that mean other authors will have to create pedagogical models of my work and that it is THEY who will be successful and not I?
  • I am still stuck with the problem that 1) THE THREE CITIES a) The anglos had the

    I am still stuck with the problem that

    1) THE THREE CITIES

    a) The anglos had the right language mode (science), the right political model (rule of law common law), the right commons model (market for commons) but the wrong theory of man (equality),.

    b) the germans had the wrong language model (literary rationalism), a typical political model (bibartate continental law), a typical commons model (decision by professional bureaucracy), and the right theory of man (hierarchy).

    c) the jews had the wrong language model (legalistic pseudoscience), political model (propaganda), commons model (none), and the wrong theory of man (separatism)

    2) THE PEDAGOGICAL VS THE DECIDABLE

    The german model is one of regulation for the prevention of conflicts at the expense of innovation. The american is one of dispute resolution for the preservation of liberty in experimentation.

    The german model of man is empirical while the anglo model is ideological – a superior german transition from aristocracy to bureaucracy.

    The german model is pedagogical an literary (literary philosophy), and the anglo model is anti-pedagogical, and limited to dispute resolution..

    The german model is to seek rational optimums while the american model is to use competition to discover optimums.

    3) What troubles me is the success of the pedagogical german model in contrast to decideable anglo model. I am an anglo analytic philosopher. I know my function. But does that mean other authors will have to create pedagogical models of my work and that it is THEY who will be successful and not I?


    Source date (UTC): 2016-04-08 08:07:00 UTC

  • We call what I do science, and what you do justificationism (lying) for a reason

    We call what I do science, and what you do justificationism (lying) for a reason. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2016-04-07 08:35:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717994100172132352

    Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717993783246217216


    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/717993783246217216

  • My statement: that any attempt to rely on rationalism rather than science is an

    My statement: that any attempt to rely on rationalism rather than science is an attempt at deceit.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-04-07 08:15:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717989054017642496

    Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717988549539139584


    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/717988549539139584

  • I haven’t found it yet. But you are trying to use unscientific language to state

    I haven’t found it yet. But you are trying to use unscientific language to state a falsehood justifying a deceit. You must.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-04-07 08:10:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717987852060123136

    Reply addressees: @mdavilamartinez

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/717987220670406656


    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/717987220670406656