Greebles and inappropriate attachment to inanimate objects in Asperger’s

I believe the tendency of aspies (particularly children in the “active but odd” stage of development) to anthropomorphize specific classes of objects (such as pencils) can be explained by a brain that is specialized for domain-specific expert pattern recognition.

There’s a region of the brain called the right inferotemporal cortex that becomes highly active in facial recognition. It is colloquially thought of as “the face-reading module” because when it is damaged, face-reading is usually the functionality that is lost. But it is probably the case that face-reading is just a particularly difficult pattern recognition problem that almost all humans are very good at, and the brain is better able to regain functionality for easier pattern recognition problems.

You can give people a new class of objects, called “greebles”, and train them over the course of weeks to recognize them by name and family paying close attention to certain features that unite families.

greebles

If you give a student an fMRI in the early stages of this task, you’ll see a lot of blood flow to several brain regions while they familiarize themselves with gross features of this new category of objects. But as the task progresses and they become experts at spotting familial traits and particular individuals in these greebles, an fMRI will begin to show blood flow concentrated much more specifically in the inferotemporal cortex (indicating the use of expert pattern recognition) and in a couple of tiny regions specialized for the task.

You can probably sense that, if you became an expert in greebles, all of them would feel a little different upon recognition as if their features, names, and family names gave them personalities, biographies, and dispositions toward one another. I think it is not a stretch to say that we tend to become experts much more quickly in perceptual tasks that have strong emotional salience, such as reading personalities through face-reading (phrenology), or reading political messages in symbology, or pointed emotional messages from a romantic interest in the language of flowers.

The Asperger’s personality is characterized by extreme levels of knowledge specialization and expert pattern recognition within these domains, specific to each aspie. Therefore, it makes sense that a child with Asperger’s would name all of his pencils and be inappropriately upset when they have to be replaced with new pencils- his brain has applied enormous emotional salience to those pencils such that his right inferotemporal cortex could tell the difference between another red pencil and “Pete” from one hundred feet.

Posted in Uncategorized | 7 Comments

Floating/flying is the aesthetic expression of Gnostic enlightenment

It took me way too long to figure this out.

Floating is a physical representation of the “mind over matter” idea. When an individual floats, they are showing their ability to conquer reality with pure thought.

When an enlightened person uses their will to elevate other objects and people, it is comparable to the “white man’s burden” to elevate unenlightened savages, animals, and nature.

Tikkun Olam fellow white people, and in the meantime enjoy the low price of cotton, software, and tacos! Isn’t it great how we can have it all? Sweatshops aren’t slavery, if you think about it we’re really helping these people.

If an entire city is floating, this indicates an enlightened civilization.

The earth itself floats in Pandora, the world of Avatar, where extant neanderthals use their blue facepaint a bit more liberally. The implication is that this world is closer to the magic of the dream world, i.e. edenism.

In Final Fantasy 3, when Emperor Gestahl (representing the old Germany defined by Goethe) recaptures the old gods and attempts to turn them to his purposes, a side effect is the temporary elevation of his continent.

When Kefka (representing the Kafka-esque Jewry, lolzzozollolz) whimsically rearranges the old gods, the imbalance releases destructive levels of energy that reshape the world’s continents. The flying continent crumbles into pieces and falls. This represents the two world wars of the 20th century and their effect on Germany and Europe as a whole.

This basic feeling runs so deep that it inspires people to invent fixed-wing aircraft and rockets.

Posted in Uncategorized | 5 Comments

Divisions of the American Alt-Right and their interests

Understanding the American Alt-Right requires an understanding of America’s white demographics and philosophical background.

liberte_egalite_fraternite

White flight

America is 63.7% non-Hispanic white. It appears that having less than a two-thirds majority was the tipping point for these non-Hispanic whites to discover identity politics. The flag breakdown refers to the dominant white cultures as explained in Albion’s Seed.

The Germans are found predominantly in Yankee states whereas the English are found predominantly in the South, and they have continued their ancestors’ tradition of hating each other’s guts throughout American history (including a very bitter civil war between them). The Irish are found pretty much everywhere and never saw a fight they didn’t like.

America was founded on French Enlightenment philosophy, but the only group that really swallowed this line was the Scots-Irish, who were desperate to take on a new identity because their old one was terrible. The first batch, especially. They believe that Montesquieu, Rousseau, Descartes, and other philosophers with French surnames generally had the right idea about morality and organizing society. They are swing voters or “Reagan Democrats” and tend to work in industry.

Everyone else’s political philosophy has regressed to their racial stereotype.

The English are (American-style) conservatives who love guns, commercial enterprise, and history. They think Adam Smith, John Locke, and other philosophers with British surnames generally had the right idea about morality and organizing society. They have traditionally voted Republican in favor of “equal rights (for English gentlemen…who own land)” and tend to own small businesses.

The Germans are (American-style) liberals who love nice neighborhoods, well-maintained roads, and the natural sciences. They think Heidegger, Kant, and other very serious-looking Germans generally had the right idea about morality and organizing society. They have traditionally voted Democrat in favor of “the common good (for my neighborhood…and higher cost of living to keep blacks out)” and tend to work for large corporations.

White fights

Germans believe in national unity because that’s the genetic strategy of a continental nation, and the English believe in tradition because that’s the genetic strategy of an island nation. In the last century, a lot of these people have found their way of life threatened by globalism and immigration, and are exhibiting the traditional stress responses of their people.

strength

Fascism is the German stress response. They are a well-oiled Panzer division. In times of stress, the Irish forget their French idealism and remember their Gaelic blood. The English stress response, naturally, is to write a scathing letter full of pedigree and historical anecdotes. (I jest, don’t piss off the Saxon.)

Many of these folks have been read out of their traditional political parties and thrown together in an unexpected alliance called the Alt-Right, fighting a 4th-generation culture war for survival against their own brainwashed kith and kin.

Here’s why all this matters:

How to divide and conquer political enemies

1. Identify the subdivisions
2. Identify their common interests and differing interests
3. Put the different interests in opposite directions, remove the common interest, polarize and separate
4. Quickly crush the more offensive, least defensive group(s)
5. Slowly crush the more defensive group(s)

The alt-right is basically made up of the alt-lite, the alt-white, and the alt-west. Their common interest is self-defense against Umbrella zombies. The alt-lites also want to go full libertardian, the alt-whites furthermore want to go full Nazi, and the alt-west wants to go full Spanish Inquisition.

milo

Milo Yiannopoulos is an example of polarization. Libertardians like Milo, the Spanish Inquisition considers him an ally, and the Nazis consider him an enemy. In terms of public acceptance (4GW defensibility), we have alt-lite > alt-west > alt-white, whereas in terms of offensive capability it’s the opposite. If the alt-whites break ranks from this polarization (alienation), they are guaranteeing that the enemy will crush them without allies to back them up or public backlash. Who cares if purity-spiraling Nazi spergs* get SWATed?

Without the offensive group, the other groups have lost their best weapons. At that point, the slow march resumes.

White knights

The moral of the story is: win first. Survive. Then we can go separate ways and purity spiral to our hearts’ content. The German stress response in 1865 was triggered by English separatism. We need to learn from history and hold off on Round 2 at least until the wall gets built.

This is 4GW. The winning condition is a future for white children. Don’t split the party!

*This is how the public would see it; personally, I have great respect for weaponized autism. We’re making anime real!

Posted in Uncategorized | 14 Comments

Is despair due to underperforming canonical neurons?

This is going to circumnavigate a bit.

I disambiguate between despair and depression thus: despair is a Frame which sees the future as hopeless because no possible actions appear to lead to good ends, whereas depression is a pessimistic emotional state adapted for high-risk, low-reward environments that is miserly about spending energy. Despair is a natural Frame for old-timey pagans and intellectually honest atheists/agnostics (because happiness is fleeting, and all actions end in darkness and death), and a sinful state for Christians, whereas depression is caused by anger leading to many frustrations over time (like all emotions, it’s just something that happens to you).

Most mirror neurons fire in three cases:

1) When we perform the neuron’s action
2) When we perform “preparatory” actions that anticipates the neuron’s action
3) Empathizing when we watch someone else perform the neuron’s action (also when we anticipate someone else performing the action)

For example, when I pick up an apple many of the neurons in area F5 fire. When I pick up a paper towel with the intention of polishing an apple, many of the same neurons in F5 fire in anticipation. When I watch someone else pick up an apple, the same neurons fire in conceptual understanding of what I’m seeing.

Recently I learned about a type of mirror neuron called a canonical neuron that also fires under a fourth condition.

A class of neurons—called canonical neurons—fires when we reach for an apple. Canonical neurons also fire at the mere sight of an apple. In other words, our brains respond identically to reaching for an apple and just seeing the apple.

There’s more. Neurons will also respond to hearing “apple,” or seeing the word on paper. In short, whether it’s by sight or sound or written symbol, our brains recognize the main idea of an object—and resonate with it.

The main idea of an apple? You eat it.

The main idea of a spear? You throw it.

As neuroscientist Marco Iacoboni says, “the [actions] necessary to obtain and eat a piece of fruit are inherently linked to our very understanding of the fruit.” French scientist Dan Sperber has suggested the term “concept neuron” for this mechanism.

If our brains can recognize the main idea of an apple of spear (and resonate accordingly—and automatically) why not also with bigger ideas like capitalism, socialism, Sunday brunch—or jihad?

Nathan Jaye
Canonical Neurons: The Main Idea

So canonical neurons fire during pickup, during anticipation, during cognitive empathy, and also simply by recognizing the possibility of performing the action.

This leads me to a weird personal anecdote. Back in the day I worked at a strip club with a lowish-functioning psychopath. One time he explained to me that he perceived most people as having “handles” that he could use to easily manipulate them as easily as arranging furniture, whereas I was conspicuously lacking in these handles because I was so caught up in my own head. In contrast, I perceive other people as hopelessly automatic and, even in the cases that I realize I can manipulate them to get what I want, I find it morally repulsive to do so.

Bringing this back around, the primary cause of despair is a perceived lack of power over one’s environment to achieve desirable outcomes. Because homo sapiens are sociopolitical competitors, the most important form of power in one’s environment is manipulation of other people’s perceptions. Thus, we’d expect that a perceived lack of handles in other people is the primary cause of despair in homo sapiens.

I believe my biological ethic in this case is flawed. Like Game or rhetoric, the use of Frame is not evil per se. It’s the use of Game for personal gratification, squandering the common trust, and moral perversion that is evil. Furthermore, just as despair is a sin, it is wrong not to use the tools we are given to serve God, self, church, kin, kith, and so on. That said I still have the feeling that advertising is still illicit in this framework somehow, so I feel I haven’t completely figured this out.

As an example of good manipulation, I recently called my dad a racist for complaining about the antics of two all-black football teams. His reply was “So what?” It seems you can teach an old dog new tricks :-). Now I just need to break him of his Churchian conviction that “almost all people are basically good at heart”.

Posted in Uncategorized | 18 Comments

Premises of Frame

Previous.

1. Framing is the act of selling a perspective by bringing attention to some contextual details which are—presumably—generally representative, and downplaying others which are not.
2. All symbolic communication is framing. (This is a “strong” version of the theory.)
3. Symbolic communication is the intentional activation of mirror neurons in another person’s brain in order to transmit associations between ideas.
4. Humans are sociopolitical primates who use Frame to compete for resources from the commonweal: particularly mates, wealth, and sociopolitical control. (This is a result of economic specialization.)

Some existing special cases of Frame are Game, sales, and propaganda.

A “good” frame is one that fits reality best using as few details as possible. Emphasizing non-representative details is some form of pretension: either incompetence, deception, insincerity, or ignorance. The difference in these is purely a matter of the framer’s character and disposition toward their subject. This is a primitive definition; it is possible for a good perspective to be transmitted via pretense if the falsehood is obvious, as in comedy, fairy tales, and proof by contradiction.

Posted in Uncategorized | 12 Comments

First attempt to describe Koanic’s Mohawk theory

See the picture gallery for definitions of the cranial regions.

This is the theory as I understand it. Most of the entries are guesses. Figure he’ll tell me where it’s wrong :-P.

Forehead:
Empathy group horizon ~ 10^5
Political allegiance: Dialect group, nation
Psychophilosophy: Statism (“That which is good for people who talk like me is good for me.”)
Value: Virtue signalling, social prestige, mores

Pre-Forehead:
Empathy group horizon ~ 10,000
Political allegiance: City
Psychophilosophy: Racism (“That which is good for people who look like me is good for me.”)
Value: Civic order, honest bargaining

Front-Cone:
Empathy group horizon ~ 1,000
Political allegiance: Tribe
Psychophilosophy: Tribalism (“That which is good for my people is good for me.”)
Value: Martial virtue, social dominance

Back-Cone:
Empathy group horizon ~ 100
Political allegiance: Clan
Psychophilosophy: Monarchism, patriarchalism (“That which is good for my extended family is good for me.”)
Value: Social hierarchy

Backswept:
Empathy group horizon ~ 10
Political allegiance: Family
Psychophilosophy: Nepotism (“That which is good for my family is good for me.”)
Value: Respect

Fauxcippital:
Empathy group horizon ~ 1
Political allegiance: Self
Psychophilosophy: Egoism (“That which is good for me, is good.”)
Value: Individual virtue

Occipital:
Empathy group horizon ~ 0
Political allegiance: Aesthetics (Purely perceiving, emotional, reactive)
Psychophilosophy: Autism (“That which seems good, is good.”)
Value: Goodfeelz, stimulation

Taking this a bit further, I suggest that Glenn’s idea of value stratification is related to an proportional overabundance of brain matter in the more abstract regions. They would have “leapfrogging loyalties” and neglect the smaller group in favor of the larger group.

“Modern liberals’ defining trait is making a public spectacle of how their loyalties leapfrog over some unworthy folks relatively close to them in favor of other people they barely know.”

Steve Sailer
The Self-Righteous Hive Mind

Given the choice between political policies that will help/harm their tribe and their clan, they will either choose to help the greater tribe at the expense of their own clan or be paralyzed by abstract perfectionism (a common behavior that arises from this trait is “letting the perfect be the enemy of the good”) and therefore ineffective in using their political influence.

Posted in Uncategorized | 16 Comments

A coupla thoughts on master/slave dynamics

Here are some things I posted previously on the forum, which I’ll add to.


The “boot on your neck” strategy reliably LOWERS performance in Thals.

I can now confirm that this is true for jobs as simple as taking things out of boxes and putting them on shelves. Applying social stress to thals (responsibilities, deadlines, goals, etc.) appears to increase the cognitive load with zero benefits, resulting in less production and a higher rate of mistakes. Apparently, we are not built for micromanagement and cognitive-behavioral social control. It seems that the highest rate of TT production occurs when the variable to be maximized is well-communicated (e.g. profit) and the “possibility space” is widest (e.g. “You can cook, clean, fix, organize, experiment, engineer, document, I don’t care as long as customers are happy.”). That is, if prosocial then allow counterfactual simulation to occur.


On the subject of IT management,

It comes down to the difference between trusting employees and letting them get things done, versus treating them like burger flippers that need to be monitored and controlled every minute, lest they wander off and sabotage everything.

Slaves are monitored constantly because they understand at a fundamental level that working hard is against their personal interest, tantamount to suicide. The worst case is to be worked harder, burn out and/or get injured, and get thrown on the trash pile and replaced. The best case is to conserve energy and steal food when possible. Free men, on the other hand, enjoy seeking profit, prestige, etc. In such a case, the “manager” is also a free man who merely serves another specialized function: to communicate and expedite. The problems occur when mindset fails to match the situation (slaves cannot be programmers because creativity requires personal space). It’s really very simple if you get down to it.


Taking this perspective, I have a couple of notes on sapiens heuristics. The first is inspired by this bit from Kipling, H/T Heaviside:

Then Mahbub Ali lowered his eyes
In the fashion of one who is weaving lies.

I don’t have to explain to aspies why this heuristic is useless, but normies will never let it go because it’s deeply wired. Then it behooves us to wonder where it comes from. Within the context of the dynamic above, it’s possible to simply ascribe this behavior to Alpha-Beta social interaction. Alphas gaslight Betas all the time (“serve my interests and you’ll be happy”), but they’re usually not called out for it because insubordination is always swiftly punished, whereas Beta-style lying tends to be more slippery (“nothing to see here sir, your happiness is my only concern in life”).

As an aside, I don’t have the typical aspie aversion to eye contact, but I also don’t have any dad issues because 1) I genuinely like the guy, and 2) his attempts to modify my social behavior (including his complaints about this) have always been so weak that they’re barely noticeable. Therefore I make eye contact for greeting and to emphasize key points when I’m talking, and look away while I’m thinking, which is pretty normal for Americans. My dad still complains because he’s strongly F-dominant in MBTI terms, and these types almost never break eye contact because all of their communication is emotional transfer. So the signal a listener gets when you look away is “I’m performing a mental calculation”, so in a master-slave interaction this is always suspect. “Why did you have to think about that? If you were really loyal (cucked) you’d be straightforward and relaxed about it!” /aside

Going a bit further back, I think the social aspects of allowable eye contact come from the existence of microexpressions-as-information, and the enforcement of asymmetrical information transfer. The master may look at the slave’s eyes in order to read their emotions (an extremely salient sort of information in a low-trust society), but the slave may not look at the master’s eyes for the same reason, enforcing their ignorance and therefore their impotence via uncertainty. It’s the same logic as starving the peasants of protein: protein makes muscles, and recent social science tells us muscles makes a person confident, assertive, and self-interested.


On a somewhat different note, I’ve been wondering lately about where common sense ideas come from. This was inspired by my boss getting upset when I eat while I’m working. It won’t make any sense to those of you with office jobs (where working through lunch is apparently considered “dedicated”), but this is an extremely common idea in blue-collar serfdom, to the extent that even customers will help to enforce this proscription. If we actually had any customers at night, they would be upset to see me take a bite from an apple while putting boxes on shelves. Why? They might spin a few rationalizations, but what it comes down to is that this “seems sloppy”, i.e. it appears as if management has lost control of its employees. I think this goes back to the Ur-idea of well-managed slaves in the fields, where they must be constantly monitored so they don’t eat the stuff they’re harvesting. The association therefore is that taking liberties indicates laziness and bad management, and any nonconformity with the assumptions of Ur-organization is a crack in the edifice.

Posted in Uncategorized | 17 Comments