Evolutionary Psychology

Admiration of the base and primal is the desire to revert to simplicity, expressing a fatigue at being a self-aware human.
It's also a secret fear of what is superior and therefore incomprehensible.

The more Evolved and Intelligent humanity becomes, the more the outliers and anomalies rise-up far higher than the public population can know. This is the "ivory tower" of genius, that, those of extremely heightened intelligence naturally want to distance themselves from the rabble. After all, what can the rabble appeal to higher intelligence, other than mere distractions and "pop-culture"?

Look on ILP. They certainly cannot offer a worthy dialogue, or even simple points of interest in conversation....


Psycho-Analysis can be a fun hobby. But without a deeper understanding of human nature as a Whole, it becomes as meaningless as Astrology. Thus a generalized view of humanity is needed, to study: Anthropology, Sociology, Politics, History, and especially "Race", then the psychologies of individuals becomes illuminated. Very few "individuals" are special, or separate from humanity. Most are mundane, with uninspired thoughts, that consume the Common (pop-culture). Because they consume their information diet from the troughs ...what they excrete from their orifices, should not surprise your sinuses.

Intelligent minds naturally seek-out intelligent minds. Those that fail, bury their focus in Libraries, where at least there is a dependable source of the Intellects who have long since passed, but remain as relevant as ever today.

*Place human breeds, i.e., races, in the context of speciation.
Reproductive isolation increases genetic distance. If reproductive isolation is insufficient in length a hybrid is produced that can still belongs to the same species.
Nihilism produces an interesting variant....as here reproductive isolation may be ideological, producing ghettoization and using prejudice to prevent or minimize interbreeding.
Memes are gene specific - extensions, therefore from genes to memes is inverted to memes to genes.
Nihilism inverts everything, negating natural order....ergo "first was the word..."   and "logos" acquires a mystical/,magical power, viz., language no longer presents world but world is created by words, or world is a representation of language.

*Oral sex brings in contact the olfactory sense with genitals to "evaluate" health - literally taste and smell the other's fitness.
We see this in many species...that sniff at orifices to evaluate fitness and readiness to copulate.
Pubic hair protects the genitals but also preserve scents.

*We see how duplicity is part of sex.
Sperm has to survive the woman's autoimmune reaction, and then the ensuing foetus must mask itself so that it is not aborted.
Note - this is part of parasitism and kryspsis, regarding meme-parasites. Here the ideology pretends to be part of the host, or beneficial towards its well-being, when it is, in fact, undermining tis survival and reproductive potentials.

*Most behaviours are "hard wired" - genetically determined.
This does not exclude the possibility for rewiring, or cultivating, alternate adjustments to these hardwired behaviours.
This is also a product of free-will, unless someone wants to argue that the universe is predisposed towards producing this rewiring.
Adaptation, itself, would be impossible without subjective judgement & choice - choice being the empirical expression of will and freedom a measure of available and accessible options.

Politics is not only war by other means, it is a projection of psychology onto the social stage.

Sloterdijk, Pete wrote:

Under this heading we discuss the discovery of the unconscious, which, as will be shown, represents a necessary consequence of the modern process of enlightenment. One of the virtually reactionary myths of the twentieth century is that Sigmund Freud is the ‘discoverer of the unconscious.’ The legend of Freud not only falsifies historical truth but also burdens the history of enlightenment with an absurd and inexplicable asymmetry and retardation in the investigation of the unconscious. How could enlightenment have investigated consciousness critically and empirically without encountering its ‘other side’?
[Critique of Cynical Reason]

Imbeciles always associate an idea with the first source that made them come in contact with it.
Imprinting.

Rule of thumb
Generally the simpler the organism the more predictable it is.
Why?
Less free-will, when free-will is defined as a qualifier of choice, referring to quantity of options and the organism's psychosomatic power to perceive them as options, and to choose them, determined by its power to overcome resistance.

Simpler organisms are governed more by their physical - genetic - programming, i.e., memories; more sophisticated organism's can usurp said programming with experiential, learned, experiential memories - they can learn by perceiving patterns and willing a different consequence form the one they project as most probable.

Satyr wrote:

Rule of thumb
Generally the simpler the organism the more predictable it is.
Why?
Less free-will, when free-will is defined as a qualifier of choice, referring to quantity of options and the organism's psychosomatic power to perceive them as options, and to choose them, determined by its power to overcome resistance.

Simpler organisms are governed more by their physical - genetic - programming, i.e., memories; more sophisticated organism's can usurp said programming with experiential, learned, experiential memories - they can learn by perceiving patterns and willing a different consequence form the one they project as most probable.

Therefore, Homo sapines can know other animals more than they can ever know themselves...and it is said that a wise man, or a genus, has many lives lived within himself, viz., he can empathise and experience existence from multiple perspectives, some completely alien to his own, without becoming emotionally involved - neither sympathetic nor antipathetic - corrupting his second-hand experiences.

I'm curious about the exceptionality of high-IQ in Nature.

Nature does not require high-IQ.  Most organisms are lowly, fish, insects, bacteria.  They don't need brains, or much cognition, to be highly successful.  This is due to very high reproductive methods.  The more r-selection an organism has, the less IQ it needs.

Sex vs Smarts.

The higher the IQ, the more longevity and 'evolution' the organism deems to have.


Is Intelligence a 'fluke' of Nature, or its primary feature?  Is Intelligence "intentional" or accidental?  A curious by-product?

I know the Abrahamic position very well: a fluke, or, God-created.  They cannot produce valid or sufficient answers.



I personally presume some degree of intentionality.  Intelligence seems to require it.  If you understand how 'you-yourself' are Caused, or part of Causal processes (Science), then intelligence directly coincides with the rise of intentionality, or, Moral Responsibility, or...

Autonomy, Self-Law, Locomotion, "First Cause"

Understanding is essential to freeing yourself from patterns. Knowledge is necessary for the perception of patterns.

If we could not change then why would we perceive patterns?
Why would we learn?

Genetics - and memetics - always give you a range of probabilities.
Always deal with the individual keeping in the back of your mind these probability ranges.
When coming across an individual belonging to another species, always approach it as an individual, keeping in mind the range of behavioural patterns it is most probably going to exhibit.

With Homo sapiens the added factor of memes - ideologies, socialization, convictions - are to be taken into consideration, within the backdrop of these genetic factors.
Genetic factors being visually detectible - physical traits - whereas memetics factors requiring a prolonged linguistic exchange exposing within which part of the genetic range the individual's training has fallen.
Most often the memetic factor are superficial and parroted, as part of an individual's training, without necessarily indicating understanding - memes can be learned and imitated producing the illusion of parity since most parrot the same convictions in public exchanges.

I've approximated the percentages of nature/nurture in determining an individuals inherited genetic potentials versus the environmental conditions that would determine how much of this potential is cultivated to 75%/25%.
I'm a bit more generous, compared to the vid.
I also allow for the chaotic factor to disturb the order or patterns being described.

Objective thinkers – true philosophers – cannot afford personal, subjective, considerations. This inhibits their honest exploration and expression of the world.
When personal, private, consequences intrude into his perceptions and their expression to the world, then he is corrupted.
The great philosophers never married nor had children... and this protected them from an additional corruptive factor. How could such a man ignore the feelings of what he loves, when he thinks and writes down what he thinks, knowing they will, at some point in time, read it? It would require an even greater layer of indifference, towards what is even closer and dearer, to overcome – a monster of all monsters.
A true objective thinker must be a loner....free from all and any intimate considerations. He is condemned to be alone before or after he has written down his thoughts, made accessible to anyone and everyone.

The failure of Marxism in the USSR, and the success of Bernay's Commercial Consumerism in America, represent a few missing pieces of the puzzle as to Class and evolved human Psychology. What the Jewish/Marxist intellectuals and psychoanalysts missed, was the genetic link between Class and Psychology.

Individual and group psychologies of humans have evolved with direct correspondence their respective Classes. This is unearthed more properly in Nietzsche's Master-Slave Dialectic. Succinctly, it's in how people speak, how philosophy enthusiasts, even today, "word" their interpretations of reality and existence, of how physics operate in existence. Consider the recent Determinist vs. Free-Will debates. Why should the masses, represented by the lower and middle classes of the world, believe in "Free-Will"? Why would they? Do they experience such? Would it benefit them, if they were free? And what does 'free' look like, to them?

Here we see the exceptionalism of Freud, Bernays, and their distinct Semitic spirit, upon their emigration and integration into the Anglo-Puritan American Empire. Put into immediate effect, American "Hollywood-ism", Americanism / Globalism, offers images, cinema, music to attach emotion, to states of Class mobility promised to Westerners, and soon through the WEF, offered to the rest of the world. That, if you buy into its system, you will "own nothing and be happy". The final stages of these Post-Marxist ideologies are coming into effect.

The masses, having been Abrahamic slaves for 3000 years, are already primed and ready. Most of "the work" has been done. In USA, the Democratic buck-breaking of African American slaves...has already been completed. There's no need to do it twice.

This something Postmodern dissidents have yet to understand, and it is why with their ignorance, they will continue to lose small battles against these 'Globalist' forces.

What Marxists have yet to learn, that Bernays did learn...

Is that you don't need to offer any actual, physical class mobility to any group or society on Earth right now.

You only need to offer them the 'choice' of it. That's enough to sway the masses, and hook them, line and sinker, to newer forms of propaganda.


As such, there are no Nationalist movements, as of yet, resistant to such mass consumer programming. Humanity is still entrenched in this Promise of Eden. Liberals-Leftists-Democrats move fast in their constant updating and upgrading of their sophisticated propaganda campaigns. Only resistance in the Far East, Eastern Ukraine, offer a rebuke against Globalist "globohomo" propaganda.

But does anybody trust the Russians or Chinese to reach-out, beyond their borders, to propagate in foreign nations? Or, that they could contend, directly compete, with Postmodernist-Neoliberals in the West? They don't stand a chance...

Postmodern Neoliberalism does not resound very well in the Far East, where human Civilizations are much older and with longer memories.

Transexuality, Homosexuality, rampant hedonism, genital mutilation, pedophilia, bestiality...all of these have been seen and 'dealt with' long ago. The Older and Oldest Civilizations already recognize Western cultural rot. They have their own histories of dealing with them (violently).

This is why Propaganda has hard and soft resistance, depending on the (age of) civilization and society.


In short, all this is to say is that what's "New" to one society, is not so to the Old societies.

Post-Marxism is always attacking ancient traditions. This is necessary for its infiltration and invasion into foreign societies. So the most rigorous centers of tradition would be undermined first and foremost. Anything that could not be undermined, would be physically attacked, revealing pockets of societal (conservative) resistance.

This is more obviously occurring in the West, right now, as 'conservative' pockets of resistance are being identified, isolated, and systemically deconstructed.

Confirmation Bias:

The Ego only wants what is 'good' (subjectively determined and genetically recognized) for itself, never what is 'bad'. This demonstrates the common morality, of common men, and the need for most of humanity to fall in line with Mass Religion. Because the masses are so easy to manipulate in this regard—tempting them with what is good, and threatening them with what is bad—the mob mentality is easy to dominate and rule over. Priestly authorities offer to interject on behalf of the Gods, leading the masses to and fro, based on these principles of positive and negative. Like a dog and farmer herding sheep—Sheeple.

A more evolved/intelligent/self-conscious/self-aware mind is required to go further with discrimination about what is "actually" good and bad for itself. People lie. Thus, what is offered as good, is often bad. What is denied as bad, is often good. Thus the Elitist classes deny to the Middle and Poor, what is good for themselves as 'bad' for all others.

Family is BAD for you (but good for me).
Secure borders is BAD for you (but good for me).
Wealth is BAD for you (but good for me).

In these, all resources are redirected according to the managers (Congress) of the State, the taxmen and economists. The average man and woman...doesn't stand a chance in hell.

Thus the differences of IQ shape and solidify 'Class' by ability, recognition of deceit, and examination of what values are actually true/good versus false/bad.

Confirmation bias fails when it is applied.
Unexpected negative consequences reveal error, which if not accurately identified and corrected simply leads to accumulating unexpected negative consequences.
Empiricism and objectivity attempts to deal with this subjective bias.

Satyr wrote:

Confirmation bias fails when it is applied.
Unexpected negative consequences reveal error, which if not accurately identified and corrected simply leads to accumulating unexpected negative consequences.
Empiricism and objectivity attempts to deal with this subjective bias.

Yes, and consider the premises.

The average man or woman is 'edumacated' not to question its premises, "God exists", "State is supreme", "Trust government authorities", etc. Because these are ingrained in the Prole from the time they can start speaking/writing, Literacy, their minds are forced into cognitive dissonance. They don't know why and how they're wrong, when met with empirical reality (Nature). They don't question their premises and axioms, so they keep trying and trying, repeating the mistake and error.

When somebody comes along, unbound by their ruleset (Class), they think of that person as a magician of sorts, "above the rules", free in ways unimaginable. Because the prole CANNOT re-examine their own premises. Some go as far as homicide or suicide, to defend core beliefs (metaphysics). These are psychologically seared into the mind of most people. You can show them techniques that are 'unapproved' by the system, but their mind won't know how such techniques operate. They won't understand the Physics. Because their mind is obedient to premises it doesn't see nor understand.

It's a mental, psychological blindness.

Questioning people at the roots, causes them great discomfort. They don't like it, and consider it a personal attack.

Hence these years and decades on philosophy forums. They respond with emotional aggression. You are a "Nazi" to question what they cannot, and never will. To run against their base, hardware programming. Their "Philosophy" is superficial, only ever scratching the surface of their cognitive dissonance. The above-average feel as something's wrong (glitch in the Matrix), but hesitate when it comes to "red-pilling". They also know, intuitively, that the blue-pill is preferable (the devil you know rather than the one you don't).

An uncertain, incomprehensible threat must be made certain and comprehensible by referring to a ideological, or cultural bogeyman.
The use of 'Nazi' has been ingrained in the 'western' psyche over decades of propaganda, revealing the dominant cultural ideal, relative to the dominant cultural threat to this ideal.
The term alone suffices to imply what the accuser cannot prove nor justify.

Like the concept 'Satan' became the all-encomassing threat to Judeo-Christian anti-nature, anti-life, spirituality.
Satan became an representation of nature.

Women care about height[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Want to network with desirable women and high status men? Hit the link [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Michael Sartain Clips (@SartainClips1) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Include homosexuality, transsexuality.....any genetic dead-end expresses anti-genetic motives.

Do you see it moving forward or backward? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

— Dr. Jebra Faushay (@JebraFaushay) [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Organ hierarchies - proportions and symmetries - determines personality.
Character is determined by environment forcing you to adapt your personality accordingly.