Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • Curt Doolittle, Analytic Philosopher of Political Economy, Ethics, Epistemology,

    Curt Doolittle, Analytic Philosopher of Political Economy, Ethics, Epistemology, Truth.

    (quora objection?)

    THE CORRECT ANSWER

    While descending from two widely separated waves “generations” that moved out of Africa, Whites have succeeded in significant juvenilization (Neoteny). Asians have succeeded in far greater juvenilization(Neoteny). Asian women are the most juvenilized women on earth. To the point at which they have even gained extended lifespans by delaying the depth of and onset of sexual maturity (compare to central asians, arabs, and sub saharan africans that have NOT engaged in juvenilization.) Secondly, for reasons I am not sure I am confident in addressing, Asians distribute their fat more evenly. And thirdly, Asian IQ is slanted to our educated classes (I suspect it is a narrower distribution because of the juvenilization – and the asian predilection for killing off malcontents in large numbers). So between a ‘more immature look’, more petite look, better weight distribution, and higher average intelligence, the pool of asian women is objectively better than the pool of available white women. Conversely asian women pay a price for mongoloid facial features, and in places like eastern europe where women maintain their weight and walk a great deal, and dress well, asian women lose their advantage.

    That’s just how it is. (I spend an absurd amount of time on mating patterns.)

    That said, it’s largely asian women and white men that account for the increase in American race mixing, since the other numbers are remaining relatively stable. (relatively).

    This is yet another example of the fact that all human behavior can be reduced to some statement analogous to economics.

    Asian women are a better ‘buy’ than white women for average males. White males are often a much better buy than equivalent asian males who have their own decreased market value. Largely because asians seem to require high context culture (which I won’t go into) and whites thrive in low context cultures. (as is evident in our languages). So asian men in asia and here are at a disadvantage.

    cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2017-12-17 00:54:00 UTC

  • My answer to Why are people so sure the current experts in science can’t be wron

    My answer to Why are people so sure the current experts in science can’t be wrong when history has shown they have … https://www.quora.com/Why-are-people-so-sure-the-current-experts-in-science-cant-be-wrong-when-history-has-shown-they-have-been-wrong-many-times-before-2/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=b1ead2df

    Source date (UTC): 2017-12-16 02:38:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/941860046220222465

  • If Humans Can’t Agree On Anything, From Donald Trump’s Sanity To The Existence Of God, How Can One Make An Objective, Rational, Decision? Is There Any Scientific Way To Cut Through The Noise?

    We are unequal. Markets consisting of voluntary exchanges eliminate extreme fantasies. Any ‘collective agreement’ is of necessity an extreme fantasy.

    https://www.quora.com/If-humans-cant-agree-on-anything-from-Donald-Trumps-sanity-to-the-existence-of-God-how-can-one-make-an-objective-rational-decision-Is-there-any-scientific-way-to-cut-through-the-noise

  • Do You Think The World’s First Trillionaire Will Have Earned The Money Legally?

    Legally and morally are two different things.
    The law is not ethical, or moral, or good, or true. It just is.
    It’s questionable whether Bezos is acting morally.
    As far as I know, at least within reason, he is acting legally.

    Asking whether something is legal or not is nonsensical.
    Was it productive, fully informed (transparent), warrantied, voluntary, and without imposition of costs against the investments of others? If yes then it is ethical, moral, and hopefully legal.

    https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-the-world’s-first-trillionaire-will-have-earned-the-money-legally

  • Do You Know Of Any Shootings Committed By White People That Are Not Reported In The Main Stream Media?

    I ANSWER UNPLEASANT QUESTIONS AS TRUTHFULLY AS POSSIBLE

    You know, I answer controversial topics, because that’s my job, and I know the data. And so I’ve ended up being one of the people that counter-signals anti-everything.

    So I sort of get angry now when I get asked to respond to questions like this, only to have my posts redacted by someone *helping to preserve ignorance and deceit* under the guise of protecting people from uncomfortable truths. In other words, protecting their market for falsehoods from correction. Because that is what all of us do. We all seek information that confirms our priors, because our priors reflect our age, gender, class, ethnic, racial evolutionary strategies. And it would be against evolution’s interests for us to seek the truth, rather than whatever is in the interest of our reproductive strategy

    The main stream media tells stories that advance the postmodern (anti-aristocratic, meaning paternal, meaning anti-western, anti-meritocratic ) narrative. There are very good economic reasons for doing so. There are very good secular religious reasons for doing so.

    There are a lot of self defense shootings, perhaps daily, but they media doesn’t report it so that they aren’t seen as advancing the use of violence.

    Black on white hate crime is rarely reported. White on black hate crime is over-reported. The media tries to cast mass killers as conservative, yet as far as I know, all mass killers are liberals. The media tried to report that conservatives were less intelligent. This turns out to be an artifact of the population sizes, not reality. (There are a lot of self-identifying conservatives, and few self identifying liberals). For example, republicans are smarter than democrats, but liberals are smarter than conservatives. Libertarians are the smartest of all. THey’re just statistically insignificant.

    I would go into the reasons for this but that’s for another time.

    Research “False Consensus Bias”, and all the other social cognitive biases.

    1. The business (like Quora, FB, Google,), the media, academy(including schools) and the government produce ‘stories’ that sell. Not truths. BEcause they all have ‘customers’ to satisfy by ‘marketing’. And in exchange for producing that marketing, they obtain ‘power’. Economic power, academic power, and political power.
    2. There is a greater market for comforting falsehoods than uncomfortable truths.
    3. It is much cheaper to produce comforting falsehoods than produce uncomfortable truths.
    4. Cheap and comforting falsehoods spread faster than expensive and uncomfortable truths.
    5. It is (usually) prohibitively expensive to falsify (reverse) desirable falsehoods with undesirable truths.

    But for some of us, out of statistical consequence, uncomfortable truths are precisely what advance our reproductive strategies. And so we soldier onward, as does everyone else.

    And those of us who understand science, economics, and history are forever the victims of the many who understand none of them.

    https://www.quora.com/Do-you-know-of-any-shootings-committed-by-white-people-that-are-not-reported-in-the-main-stream-media

  • If Humans Can’t Agree On Anything, From Donald Trump’s Sanity To The Existence Of God, How Can One Make An Objective, Rational, Decision? Is There Any Scientific Way To Cut Through The Noise?

    We are unequal. Markets consisting of voluntary exchanges eliminate extreme fantasies. Any ‘collective agreement’ is of necessity an extreme fantasy.

    https://www.quora.com/If-humans-cant-agree-on-anything-from-Donald-Trumps-sanity-to-the-existence-of-God-how-can-one-make-an-objective-rational-decision-Is-there-any-scientific-way-to-cut-through-the-noise

  • Do You Think The World’s First Trillionaire Will Have Earned The Money Legally?

    Legally and morally are two different things.
    The law is not ethical, or moral, or good, or true. It just is.
    It’s questionable whether Bezos is acting morally.
    As far as I know, at least within reason, he is acting legally.

    Asking whether something is legal or not is nonsensical.
    Was it productive, fully informed (transparent), warrantied, voluntary, and without imposition of costs against the investments of others? If yes then it is ethical, moral, and hopefully legal.

    https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-the-world’s-first-trillionaire-will-have-earned-the-money-legally

  • Do You Know Of Any Shootings Committed By White People That Are Not Reported In The Main Stream Media?

    I ANSWER UNPLEASANT QUESTIONS AS TRUTHFULLY AS POSSIBLE

    You know, I answer controversial topics, because that’s my job, and I know the data. And so I’ve ended up being one of the people that counter-signals anti-everything.

    So I sort of get angry now when I get asked to respond to questions like this, only to have my posts redacted by someone *helping to preserve ignorance and deceit* under the guise of protecting people from uncomfortable truths. In other words, protecting their market for falsehoods from correction. Because that is what all of us do. We all seek information that confirms our priors, because our priors reflect our age, gender, class, ethnic, racial evolutionary strategies. And it would be against evolution’s interests for us to seek the truth, rather than whatever is in the interest of our reproductive strategy

    The main stream media tells stories that advance the postmodern (anti-aristocratic, meaning paternal, meaning anti-western, anti-meritocratic ) narrative. There are very good economic reasons for doing so. There are very good secular religious reasons for doing so.

    There are a lot of self defense shootings, perhaps daily, but they media doesn’t report it so that they aren’t seen as advancing the use of violence.

    Black on white hate crime is rarely reported. White on black hate crime is over-reported. The media tries to cast mass killers as conservative, yet as far as I know, all mass killers are liberals. The media tried to report that conservatives were less intelligent. This turns out to be an artifact of the population sizes, not reality. (There are a lot of self-identifying conservatives, and few self identifying liberals). For example, republicans are smarter than democrats, but liberals are smarter than conservatives. Libertarians are the smartest of all. THey’re just statistically insignificant.

    I would go into the reasons for this but that’s for another time.

    Research “False Consensus Bias”, and all the other social cognitive biases.

    1. The business (like Quora, FB, Google,), the media, academy(including schools) and the government produce ‘stories’ that sell. Not truths. BEcause they all have ‘customers’ to satisfy by ‘marketing’. And in exchange for producing that marketing, they obtain ‘power’. Economic power, academic power, and political power.
    2. There is a greater market for comforting falsehoods than uncomfortable truths.
    3. It is much cheaper to produce comforting falsehoods than produce uncomfortable truths.
    4. Cheap and comforting falsehoods spread faster than expensive and uncomfortable truths.
    5. It is (usually) prohibitively expensive to falsify (reverse) desirable falsehoods with undesirable truths.

    But for some of us, out of statistical consequence, uncomfortable truths are precisely what advance our reproductive strategies. And so we soldier onward, as does everyone else.

    And those of us who understand science, economics, and history are forever the victims of the many who understand none of them.

    https://www.quora.com/Do-you-know-of-any-shootings-committed-by-white-people-that-are-not-reported-in-the-main-stream-media

  • How Often Does It Happen That Someone Who Testifies In Court Who Perjures Himself Is Convicted And Sentenced?

    Perjury is very common, especially in family court, less so in criminal court, and less so as we move to less and less serious crimes. However, the law distinguishes between false testimony, obstruction and perjury. And in general, these matters are resolved in the court room, because such things are fairly obvious to all concerned. The reason being that incentives are fairly obvious things. And people tend to judge on incentives not testimony.

    For example, of the tens of thousands of cases each year, it is pretty uncommon (I don’t have any data right now to refer to) for it to go farther than low double digits.

    https://www.quora.com/How-often-does-it-happen-that-someone-who-testifies-in-court-who-perjures-himself-is-convicted-and-sentenced

  • How Often Does It Happen That Someone Who Testifies In Court Who Perjures Himself Is Convicted And Sentenced?

    Perjury is very common, especially in family court, less so in criminal court, and less so as we move to less and less serious crimes. However, the law distinguishes between false testimony, obstruction and perjury. And in general, these matters are resolved in the court room, because such things are fairly obvious to all concerned. The reason being that incentives are fairly obvious things. And people tend to judge on incentives not testimony.

    For example, of the tens of thousands of cases each year, it is pretty uncommon (I don’t have any data right now to refer to) for it to go farther than low double digits.

    https://www.quora.com/How-often-does-it-happen-that-someone-who-testifies-in-court-who-perjures-himself-is-convicted-and-sentenced