Men Evolved for Analytics (politics) and Women for Empathy (children) https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/men-evolved-for-analytics-politics-and-women-for-empathy-children/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 15:38:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265668827674787842
Oct 29, 2019, 7:43 PM (sarcastic humor warning) Yes, the ability of the Academy to sell non-stem courses in and emotional sedation to women wiling to pay 100k for a non-science degree in pseudosciences, sophisms and fictionalisms like psychology, sociology, marketing, human relations, ‘business’, ‘nonsense-studies’, – “advance mothering and gossiping” – without demonstrating cognitive ability in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, and economics does in fact fund the entire edifice, and at the same time nearly eradicate rates of reproduction. This is the problem throughout history. Women in every civlization conform to whatever other women conform to no matter how … questionable – whether islamic suppression, or endemic tolerance for physical abuse, or the marxist, postmodern,, feminist, and denialist folly of equality that takes advantage of the female cognitive fear of she or her children being left behind in the resource distribution – or worse, left behind as the band and tribe migrate to new territories. Women are how the they brought christianity in to undermine the empire, and women are how the marxist, postmodernists, and feminists, brought their repetition of the destruction of civilization into ours. Women evolved for empathy to extend their nervous system to infants and children who are unable to communicate. Men are easily fooled by women day in day out. We lack their empathy. But we men evolved for politics (empiricism). We are not fooled in politics – we are just fooled by women. And interestingly enough, the enemy uses the feminine technique of women to undermine our civilization using our women. Otherwise we would never have had the present problems, because we would never have had other than a conservative president and senate. Edit
Oct 29, 2019, 7:43 PM (sarcastic humor warning) Yes, the ability of the Academy to sell non-stem courses in and emotional sedation to women wiling to pay 100k for a non-science degree in pseudosciences, sophisms and fictionalisms like psychology, sociology, marketing, human relations, ‘business’, ‘nonsense-studies’, – “advance mothering and gossiping” – without demonstrating cognitive ability in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, and economics does in fact fund the entire edifice, and at the same time nearly eradicate rates of reproduction. This is the problem throughout history. Women in every civlization conform to whatever other women conform to no matter how … questionable – whether islamic suppression, or endemic tolerance for physical abuse, or the marxist, postmodern,, feminist, and denialist folly of equality that takes advantage of the female cognitive fear of she or her children being left behind in the resource distribution – or worse, left behind as the band and tribe migrate to new territories. Women are how the they brought christianity in to undermine the empire, and women are how the marxist, postmodernists, and feminists, brought their repetition of the destruction of civilization into ours. Women evolved for empathy to extend their nervous system to infants and children who are unable to communicate. Men are easily fooled by women day in day out. We lack their empathy. But we men evolved for politics (empiricism). We are not fooled in politics – we are just fooled by women. And interestingly enough, the enemy uses the feminine technique of women to undermine our civilization using our women. Otherwise we would never have had the present problems, because we would never have had other than a conservative president and senate. Edit
Oct 30, 2019, 9:09 AM While I understand the sentiment, and understand the need to restore masculinity, I don’t MGTOW – I only do truth, reciprocity, compatibilism, markets, and anti-feminism, anti-marxism, anti-postmodernism, and re-masculinization through restoration of bonding through competition and achievement, and re-militarization to preserve hierarchy in role, equality in value, self sacrifice for the common good. You do not see me in MGTOW circles. MGTOW is an expression of withdrawal, in the christian and buddhist models, not an expression of achievement or restoration. The movement exists because men feel they can only achieve individually improvement, instead collective improvement of in civic groups. This again was the product of feminism in eduction, both undermining male boding by competition, and male bonding by military conflict, and male bonding in commercial endeavors, and male bonding in civic improvement. MGTOW is the incorrect strategy. Instead it is restoration of male social orders that create male tribal spaces, leaving women to their nesting spaces. We must restore the destruction of male civc organizations by the feminists using the court system, to deprive men of the equivalent of the female brood and her gossip circle of friends. We must eliminate the dysgenia of the state incentives to redistribute disproportionate male contribution to state revenues, to disproportionate female consumption of state services, without reciprocal exchange. End common property, alimony, child support, and women must fund ‘women’s issues’ with their revenues. Just as men musts fund ‘mens issues’ with their revenues. Unless they exchange in trades. We must restore reciprocity and compatibility. And to do that we must threaten retribution and restitution, by equal and opposite means. Which is how I argue the return to compromise: “We can easily reverse asymmetric female benefit from asymmetric male contribution, so that male asymmetric contribution remains male asymmetric benefit. Or we can compromise and return to exchanges that is the very reason why western women had standing to abuse any asymmetric benefit.
Teach Stoic Method, Masculine Aryan Virtues-Feminine Christian Values, Epicurean Means
Restore voluntary association and disassociation in law.
Restore men’s sport, military, trade, commercial, and civilc organizations.
De-Financialize the economy, and end consumer interest, to restore working and middle class reproduction, and restore rates of reproduction.
Restore the “church” under secular, traditional, christian-feminine, and pagan-masculine options instead of the academy-state as the central organ of education, family, and family finance, creating the most advanced system of family support ever existing in human history.
Reform academy by limiting it to the teaching of courses in calculative and operationally constructible methods; cause all colleges and universities to warranty their services; cause all colleges and universities to carry any and all student debt – payable within six years; restore the division of grades 8+ to trades, clerical, managerial, professional, entrepreneurial, financial, and scientific specialization. And have children in education overlap ages in this classroom to compensate for different rates of development, or separate into classrooms again by degree of development that masks the fact that the principle difference between us is the tradeoff between rate of physical maturity and rate of leaning increasingly complex content.(and ending stigmas that wrongly stick thru life). Yes we are all in the end different in cognitive complexity we are not different in achievement within our degree of cognitive complexity. This is the issue. We can learn conscientiousness to some degree even if we cannot learn to learn complexity faster.
Restore all production of commons to the sphere of influence and responsibility over the commons, but limiting the federal to it’s functions, state and city-state to its functions, county to its functions, locality to its functions, neighborhood to its functions, and family to its functions and individual to his functions.
This will restore mutual consideration and care, the civic society only europeans developed, and the high trust civilization upon which all of our privileges both western and across all mankind derived.
Oct 30, 2019, 9:09 AM While I understand the sentiment, and understand the need to restore masculinity, I don’t MGTOW – I only do truth, reciprocity, compatibilism, markets, and anti-feminism, anti-marxism, anti-postmodernism, and re-masculinization through restoration of bonding through competition and achievement, and re-militarization to preserve hierarchy in role, equality in value, self sacrifice for the common good. You do not see me in MGTOW circles. MGTOW is an expression of withdrawal, in the christian and buddhist models, not an expression of achievement or restoration. The movement exists because men feel they can only achieve individually improvement, instead collective improvement of in civic groups. This again was the product of feminism in eduction, both undermining male boding by competition, and male bonding by military conflict, and male bonding in commercial endeavors, and male bonding in civic improvement. MGTOW is the incorrect strategy. Instead it is restoration of male social orders that create male tribal spaces, leaving women to their nesting spaces. We must restore the destruction of male civc organizations by the feminists using the court system, to deprive men of the equivalent of the female brood and her gossip circle of friends. We must eliminate the dysgenia of the state incentives to redistribute disproportionate male contribution to state revenues, to disproportionate female consumption of state services, without reciprocal exchange. End common property, alimony, child support, and women must fund ‘women’s issues’ with their revenues. Just as men musts fund ‘mens issues’ with their revenues. Unless they exchange in trades. We must restore reciprocity and compatibility. And to do that we must threaten retribution and restitution, by equal and opposite means. Which is how I argue the return to compromise: “We can easily reverse asymmetric female benefit from asymmetric male contribution, so that male asymmetric contribution remains male asymmetric benefit. Or we can compromise and return to exchanges that is the very reason why western women had standing to abuse any asymmetric benefit.
Teach Stoic Method, Masculine Aryan Virtues-Feminine Christian Values, Epicurean Means
Restore voluntary association and disassociation in law.
Restore men’s sport, military, trade, commercial, and civilc organizations.
De-Financialize the economy, and end consumer interest, to restore working and middle class reproduction, and restore rates of reproduction.
Restore the “church” under secular, traditional, christian-feminine, and pagan-masculine options instead of the academy-state as the central organ of education, family, and family finance, creating the most advanced system of family support ever existing in human history.
Reform academy by limiting it to the teaching of courses in calculative and operationally constructible methods; cause all colleges and universities to warranty their services; cause all colleges and universities to carry any and all student debt – payable within six years; restore the division of grades 8+ to trades, clerical, managerial, professional, entrepreneurial, financial, and scientific specialization. And have children in education overlap ages in this classroom to compensate for different rates of development, or separate into classrooms again by degree of development that masks the fact that the principle difference between us is the tradeoff between rate of physical maturity and rate of leaning increasingly complex content.(and ending stigmas that wrongly stick thru life). Yes we are all in the end different in cognitive complexity we are not different in achievement within our degree of cognitive complexity. This is the issue. We can learn conscientiousness to some degree even if we cannot learn to learn complexity faster.
Restore all production of commons to the sphere of influence and responsibility over the commons, but limiting the federal to it’s functions, state and city-state to its functions, county to its functions, locality to its functions, neighborhood to its functions, and family to its functions and individual to his functions.
This will restore mutual consideration and care, the civic society only europeans developed, and the high trust civilization upon which all of our privileges both western and across all mankind derived.
Women are more easily persuaded by the modern-day mantra of “Whatever makes you happy” https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/women-are-more-easily-persuaded-by-the-modern-day-mantra-of-whatever-makes-you-happy/
Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 15:31:23 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265666918805114888
Oct 30, 2019, 9:55 AM WOMEN EVOLVED to make use of the market for sovereignty, particularly sovereignty from males seeking to limit their choice of reproduction and limits to their consumption. Conversely, men in collections of brothers, evolved to kill off rival collections of brothers, in order to obtain their property and their females. And men evolved cooperation using tools to constrain alphas in order to redistribute access to females for sex, and care. (reproduction is not in male minds until property evolves)
—“Women initiate more divorces because we’re more easily persuaded by the modern-day mantra of “Whatever makes you happy”. It is entirely due to our capacity to prioritise feelings over truth.’—Lisa Outhwaite
Lisa is insightful. But i’ll clarify a bit that that women have always and everywhere been hypergamic, and men willing to kill more so over women than any other reason by orders of magnitude, which is the origin of our ‘pairing off’ prior to our institution of marriage. When we evolved a division of labor, specialized tools, equipment, and constructions, animal property, and territorial property, we evolved marriage, but the property division was a women and her children and a man and his assets – which is a necessary division of the means of survival. So in contemporary economic productivity, there is no cost to women’s exercise of disassociation, and there are, as she says above, many incentives from the feminist movement, the postmodernist movement, and the anti-white male, anti-western civilization movement, and women always conform to whatever higher status women conform to, no matter what those women conform to. I’ll state “Whatever Makes You Happy” scientifically: the organization of the female brain, it’s developmental differences in connectivity and size, and it’s bias in hormones to cause that differences (brains are grown), creates a far more numerous, for more intense, far more urgent, stimulation of independent networks creating far more demand for her attention, and attention that causes her to bear costs (effort) to maintain in stable state (control). This is a purely physical process she has ver little control over and evolution prohibited her from having control over. Men by contrast ‘use less of our brains’ which is better said as men’s brains evolved for the opposite function, and they are organized to “compartmentalize information” so that it is limited to the physical world and physical body, so that we will bear physical costs on behalf of one another, of women, and of children they raise. Between work on the constitution, work on completing religion, work on migrating to the mainstream, work on the institute, work on Michael’s collection of my essays, and not working on the main book I need to publish, I am trying to make time to finish the Foundations course, and the explanation of the brain and behavior in operational terms, so that we are no longer attribute to petty psychologizing that which is a physical difference instructions of our brains, that evolution discovered was necessary for us to rise to the top of the planetary food chain. Once that is done, we will see the relationship between the structure of the brain, operational language, testimonial speech, psychological acquisitionism, ethical and moral propertarianism, and social compatibilism, that is only optimized by extending the structure of the brain into our institutions: markets in everything. The brain evolved to function as a market for attention, with differences in the cost of attention, by region, module, and sub-organ, determining differences in costs of providing attention to that region, module, and sub-organ. Even this description describes compatibilism. I only do compatibilism, for the purpose of maximum quality of life while in pursuit of maximum eugenic evolution, with maximum speed, for the maximum achievement of mankind, in the shortest possible time, given the hostility of the planet and the universe to the development of intelligent life forms, that require long periods of stability and short periods of stress to incrementally evolve. In other words, I always and everywhere take a question to its last criteria of decidability using what we call in computer science ‘exhaustive search’. Cheers
Oct 30, 2019, 9:55 AM WOMEN EVOLVED to make use of the market for sovereignty, particularly sovereignty from males seeking to limit their choice of reproduction and limits to their consumption. Conversely, men in collections of brothers, evolved to kill off rival collections of brothers, in order to obtain their property and their females. And men evolved cooperation using tools to constrain alphas in order to redistribute access to females for sex, and care. (reproduction is not in male minds until property evolves)
—“Women initiate more divorces because we’re more easily persuaded by the modern-day mantra of “Whatever makes you happy”. It is entirely due to our capacity to prioritise feelings over truth.’—Lisa Outhwaite
Lisa is insightful. But i’ll clarify a bit that that women have always and everywhere been hypergamic, and men willing to kill more so over women than any other reason by orders of magnitude, which is the origin of our ‘pairing off’ prior to our institution of marriage. When we evolved a division of labor, specialized tools, equipment, and constructions, animal property, and territorial property, we evolved marriage, but the property division was a women and her children and a man and his assets – which is a necessary division of the means of survival. So in contemporary economic productivity, there is no cost to women’s exercise of disassociation, and there are, as she says above, many incentives from the feminist movement, the postmodernist movement, and the anti-white male, anti-western civilization movement, and women always conform to whatever higher status women conform to, no matter what those women conform to. I’ll state “Whatever Makes You Happy” scientifically: the organization of the female brain, it’s developmental differences in connectivity and size, and it’s bias in hormones to cause that differences (brains are grown), creates a far more numerous, for more intense, far more urgent, stimulation of independent networks creating far more demand for her attention, and attention that causes her to bear costs (effort) to maintain in stable state (control). This is a purely physical process she has ver little control over and evolution prohibited her from having control over. Men by contrast ‘use less of our brains’ which is better said as men’s brains evolved for the opposite function, and they are organized to “compartmentalize information” so that it is limited to the physical world and physical body, so that we will bear physical costs on behalf of one another, of women, and of children they raise. Between work on the constitution, work on completing religion, work on migrating to the mainstream, work on the institute, work on Michael’s collection of my essays, and not working on the main book I need to publish, I am trying to make time to finish the Foundations course, and the explanation of the brain and behavior in operational terms, so that we are no longer attribute to petty psychologizing that which is a physical difference instructions of our brains, that evolution discovered was necessary for us to rise to the top of the planetary food chain. Once that is done, we will see the relationship between the structure of the brain, operational language, testimonial speech, psychological acquisitionism, ethical and moral propertarianism, and social compatibilism, that is only optimized by extending the structure of the brain into our institutions: markets in everything. The brain evolved to function as a market for attention, with differences in the cost of attention, by region, module, and sub-organ, determining differences in costs of providing attention to that region, module, and sub-organ. Even this description describes compatibilism. I only do compatibilism, for the purpose of maximum quality of life while in pursuit of maximum eugenic evolution, with maximum speed, for the maximum achievement of mankind, in the shortest possible time, given the hostility of the planet and the universe to the development of intelligent life forms, that require long periods of stability and short periods of stress to incrementally evolve. In other words, I always and everywhere take a question to its last criteria of decidability using what we call in computer science ‘exhaustive search’. Cheers
Oct 30, 2019, 10:31 PM ONCE YOU “C” IT YOU CAN’T UN”C” IT CULTURE The future is birthed from culture and nature. Culture defined as masculine and nature feminine. The divide IS this deep. It takes the interplay between each domain in positive feedback in order to produce outcomes better suited to cope with each sphere. Not only this; but because children (the future) are malleable {unlike the PAST <stop trying to fix that bit; it’s in the PAST} they will adapt to the environment mediated by the two interwoven parents. BUT (big but), because we are mal-adaptively adaptive [we make excuses for the animal; we justify suffering] we must constrain and control feedback from both culture and nature to be maximally adversarial without dipping into deeply traumatic [and we must be able to tell the difference between the two]. We must have constraint. CONSTRAINTS Boundaries, borders, boxes, branding; by and large allow for form and function to emerge. A world without constraint is maximally entropic. Non-existent. And the bucking of our constraints in the abstract (thought realms) have only made us upset about manifestation constrained by said constraints in the real-world; because pretending something doesn’t exist isn’t the same as it truly not existing. These are limits; moving past them only warps the fabric of reality in way unaccounted for; we eschew comprehensive and correspondent constraint at risk of dire consequence. We are witness to this now in the biological realm [the combination/meshing/blurring of masculine and feminine into something that is neither]. The hard constraints are where human beings ought to exercise some control. CONTROL Neither the left nor the right like control. Hell, animals don’t like to be controlled; they already have plenty of constraint; their limitations innate are infuriating enough on their own. Except they aren’t. We control territory (property), we control animals, we control our children, we control ourselves (emotions); we ought to be in control. Recently a loss of control is being lauded as brave and courageous. The only relation a loss of control has to bravery and courage is the landscape lacking control requires bravery and courage to overturn. Nobody likes telling a child that they must calm down; especially the children! BUT, we (adults)[father; culture] ought to know what’s good for them. Look, I empathize; nature (mother) has abused us and we rebelled by tempering her with culture (father); who in-turn insulated us from the love of our mother (as well as her devouring nature) so much so we crave her reappearance. But, just because we lack love doesn’t mean we ought to annihilate discipline. It’s the alternation between the two extremes; single mother-hood and single father-hood that is leaving children in their infantile state well beyond the years they ought to be. Which bring us to necessary complexity. COMPLEXITY Complexity is emergent via constraint and control through time. Complexity isn’t complicated it’s multi-variant and multi-faceted. A complex being holds the feminine and the masculine in balance. Uses each to the extent necessary in the domain that’s appropriate with expert timing and tact. What it means to be a transcendent human is to eschew (…better integrate) the animal impulses that drive you. That is a truly transcendent complex being; it’s a complexity (paradox) that only humans can hold; and many human animals seemingly can’t. We have an unhelpful crossing of domains; too many men acting like bitches in domains where bitching ought to get you pummeled. And to many women acting as tyrants as if they have the violent ability to enforce their preference on the rest of us; they DON’T. We have a hoard of hypocrites. Hypocrites that believe creativity is to deny the existent and operate as if it doesn’t exist in the very space in which it certainly does {denying reality}. This ISN’T creative {creativity stems and springs from emergent connection WITH nature NOT the denial of its existence} what you’re creating is destruction. CREATIVITY True creativity comes from allowing and synergistically coopting the emergent complexity arising from constraint and control. Why? Simply because you’re not fighting the very things that give you form and function. To rebel against the complexity of life; to revert to animal status and raise those animal instincts above the man is to relegate men back to animal company. Destruction NOT creation. A return to nature NOT a higher culture. Being creatively destructive isn’t exactly creation (production). Being creatively destructive can bring back the necessary landscape for creation (production), but this ought to be a last-ditch effort; one taken up when hope has been lost… and be wary, hope has been lost since before Obama; why do you think “Hope and Change” resonated with so many? Your creativity in a direction away from compatibility (individualism; atomization) is crippling our ability to complement each-other leaving us to converge in temperament and pursuit, eliminating dimorphism and specialization along with the gains that come from cohesion and cooperation. COMPATIBILITY Masculine integrated with the feminine; culture controlling nature; packs tempering the preference of the herds; law lending a landscape of love… Life is birthed of compatible optimally adversarial antagonistic forces; that force one another to improve in their domains yet still be desirable to the other. To become similar or much worse, the same; is to remove all the good we do each-other and relegate competition to the realm of consumption and resources. Compatibility allows for creativity in the complementary space; there are many more modes of success with a partner (family, community) than without; and to the extent we tool this place so this reality increasing becomes NOT the case, we do ourselves and humanity a disservice. We undermine the family unit for individual units and quite frankly kill the future before it is born at all. Which brings us to compliments. COMPLEMENTS Compatibility is one thing; complement is another. Because compatibility exists complements emerge. We combine as partners; constrained by biology, controlled by culture, infinitely complex in nature allowing us to be creative (adapt) in our complementary skills. We specialize in completing (complementing) our environments. The human environment mostly made up of human beings. As it is humans we deal with most often. Dimorphism and specialization NOT atomization (individualism) are the ways to prosperity. This “forces” the cohesion of man and women which provides a landscape of children to uphold future generations. COHESION Due to the nature of culture (patriarchy) as human nature (nurture; family) at scale; cohesion is needed to ensure children are loved and disciplined in a fashion so that this system of continual improvement can keep on keeping on. A culture that puts its future (children) ahead of its present (preference, typically “animal”) and doesn’t seek to rectify the past (what is dead) is ideal. Not because you shouldn’t indulge in what it means to be a human animal (because you should it’s part of thee ride) but because that ought not be your ultimate aim. It’s the pursuit NOT the happiness that is the genius behind the words in the American Declaration. And if the founding fathers understood what technology was coming around the bend {you may be thinking Facebook; but I’m thinking weaponized lying and justification of wants} they wouldn’t have worded that bit so ambiguously. Cohesion around the understanding that future flourishing is paramount if we’d like to continue this human experiment into perpetuity. Perpetuity being the ball you ought to keep your eye on. Children being the only thing that allow for its perpetuation. COOPERATION And here we are; at the beginning and the end. The Alpha and Omega. Cooperation; the emergent morality between living beings IS the end all be all of the human experiment. Maintaining a landscape of sovereignty solving for cooperation is optimal. It’s the ideal system of human interaction and it posits no aim but this: cooperation IS the optimum strategy for the living and forgoing cooperation (when able) for predation or parasitism is immoral (bad). The natural law of reciprocity ensures our cohesion expands beyond the realm of mating; that we continue to complement one another in every human realm and that we remain compatible. It posits that we create rather than destroy; that complex agents controlled by simple rules beat out simple agents following complicated rules 10 times out of 10; and that it’s our cultural constraints that allow our (any) culture to form and function… See once you see it you can’t unsee it.
Oct 30, 2019, 10:31 PM ONCE YOU “C” IT YOU CAN’T UN”C” IT CULTURE The future is birthed from culture and nature. Culture defined as masculine and nature feminine. The divide IS this deep. It takes the interplay between each domain in positive feedback in order to produce outcomes better suited to cope with each sphere. Not only this; but because children (the future) are malleable {unlike the PAST <stop trying to fix that bit; it’s in the PAST} they will adapt to the environment mediated by the two interwoven parents. BUT (big but), because we are mal-adaptively adaptive [we make excuses for the animal; we justify suffering] we must constrain and control feedback from both culture and nature to be maximally adversarial without dipping into deeply traumatic [and we must be able to tell the difference between the two]. We must have constraint. CONSTRAINTS Boundaries, borders, boxes, branding; by and large allow for form and function to emerge. A world without constraint is maximally entropic. Non-existent. And the bucking of our constraints in the abstract (thought realms) have only made us upset about manifestation constrained by said constraints in the real-world; because pretending something doesn’t exist isn’t the same as it truly not existing. These are limits; moving past them only warps the fabric of reality in way unaccounted for; we eschew comprehensive and correspondent constraint at risk of dire consequence. We are witness to this now in the biological realm [the combination/meshing/blurring of masculine and feminine into something that is neither]. The hard constraints are where human beings ought to exercise some control. CONTROL Neither the left nor the right like control. Hell, animals don’t like to be controlled; they already have plenty of constraint; their limitations innate are infuriating enough on their own. Except they aren’t. We control territory (property), we control animals, we control our children, we control ourselves (emotions); we ought to be in control. Recently a loss of control is being lauded as brave and courageous. The only relation a loss of control has to bravery and courage is the landscape lacking control requires bravery and courage to overturn. Nobody likes telling a child that they must calm down; especially the children! BUT, we (adults)[father; culture] ought to know what’s good for them. Look, I empathize; nature (mother) has abused us and we rebelled by tempering her with culture (father); who in-turn insulated us from the love of our mother (as well as her devouring nature) so much so we crave her reappearance. But, just because we lack love doesn’t mean we ought to annihilate discipline. It’s the alternation between the two extremes; single mother-hood and single father-hood that is leaving children in their infantile state well beyond the years they ought to be. Which bring us to necessary complexity. COMPLEXITY Complexity is emergent via constraint and control through time. Complexity isn’t complicated it’s multi-variant and multi-faceted. A complex being holds the feminine and the masculine in balance. Uses each to the extent necessary in the domain that’s appropriate with expert timing and tact. What it means to be a transcendent human is to eschew (…better integrate) the animal impulses that drive you. That is a truly transcendent complex being; it’s a complexity (paradox) that only humans can hold; and many human animals seemingly can’t. We have an unhelpful crossing of domains; too many men acting like bitches in domains where bitching ought to get you pummeled. And to many women acting as tyrants as if they have the violent ability to enforce their preference on the rest of us; they DON’T. We have a hoard of hypocrites. Hypocrites that believe creativity is to deny the existent and operate as if it doesn’t exist in the very space in which it certainly does {denying reality}. This ISN’T creative {creativity stems and springs from emergent connection WITH nature NOT the denial of its existence} what you’re creating is destruction. CREATIVITY True creativity comes from allowing and synergistically coopting the emergent complexity arising from constraint and control. Why? Simply because you’re not fighting the very things that give you form and function. To rebel against the complexity of life; to revert to animal status and raise those animal instincts above the man is to relegate men back to animal company. Destruction NOT creation. A return to nature NOT a higher culture. Being creatively destructive isn’t exactly creation (production). Being creatively destructive can bring back the necessary landscape for creation (production), but this ought to be a last-ditch effort; one taken up when hope has been lost… and be wary, hope has been lost since before Obama; why do you think “Hope and Change” resonated with so many? Your creativity in a direction away from compatibility (individualism; atomization) is crippling our ability to complement each-other leaving us to converge in temperament and pursuit, eliminating dimorphism and specialization along with the gains that come from cohesion and cooperation. COMPATIBILITY Masculine integrated with the feminine; culture controlling nature; packs tempering the preference of the herds; law lending a landscape of love… Life is birthed of compatible optimally adversarial antagonistic forces; that force one another to improve in their domains yet still be desirable to the other. To become similar or much worse, the same; is to remove all the good we do each-other and relegate competition to the realm of consumption and resources. Compatibility allows for creativity in the complementary space; there are many more modes of success with a partner (family, community) than without; and to the extent we tool this place so this reality increasing becomes NOT the case, we do ourselves and humanity a disservice. We undermine the family unit for individual units and quite frankly kill the future before it is born at all. Which brings us to compliments. COMPLEMENTS Compatibility is one thing; complement is another. Because compatibility exists complements emerge. We combine as partners; constrained by biology, controlled by culture, infinitely complex in nature allowing us to be creative (adapt) in our complementary skills. We specialize in completing (complementing) our environments. The human environment mostly made up of human beings. As it is humans we deal with most often. Dimorphism and specialization NOT atomization (individualism) are the ways to prosperity. This “forces” the cohesion of man and women which provides a landscape of children to uphold future generations. COHESION Due to the nature of culture (patriarchy) as human nature (nurture; family) at scale; cohesion is needed to ensure children are loved and disciplined in a fashion so that this system of continual improvement can keep on keeping on. A culture that puts its future (children) ahead of its present (preference, typically “animal”) and doesn’t seek to rectify the past (what is dead) is ideal. Not because you shouldn’t indulge in what it means to be a human animal (because you should it’s part of thee ride) but because that ought not be your ultimate aim. It’s the pursuit NOT the happiness that is the genius behind the words in the American Declaration. And if the founding fathers understood what technology was coming around the bend {you may be thinking Facebook; but I’m thinking weaponized lying and justification of wants} they wouldn’t have worded that bit so ambiguously. Cohesion around the understanding that future flourishing is paramount if we’d like to continue this human experiment into perpetuity. Perpetuity being the ball you ought to keep your eye on. Children being the only thing that allow for its perpetuation. COOPERATION And here we are; at the beginning and the end. The Alpha and Omega. Cooperation; the emergent morality between living beings IS the end all be all of the human experiment. Maintaining a landscape of sovereignty solving for cooperation is optimal. It’s the ideal system of human interaction and it posits no aim but this: cooperation IS the optimum strategy for the living and forgoing cooperation (when able) for predation or parasitism is immoral (bad). The natural law of reciprocity ensures our cohesion expands beyond the realm of mating; that we continue to complement one another in every human realm and that we remain compatible. It posits that we create rather than destroy; that complex agents controlled by simple rules beat out simple agents following complicated rules 10 times out of 10; and that it’s our cultural constraints that allow our (any) culture to form and function… See once you see it you can’t unsee it.