Neuroglandular theory of personality (and racial culture)

This is fairly speculative at this point, but it’s what I believe at the moment. Mentally insert a “(maybe)” somewhere in each clause so I don’t have to.

A person’s moral values are determined by their neurotransmitter set points (roughly corresponding to craniology), and their behavioral strategy is determined by their endocrinal set points (roughly corresponding to phrenology and somatotype).

For an example of a neurotransmitter set point, I’ll use endorphins. This is a chemical that is released in response to pain and self-inhibition/perseverance (suffering in the older sense), as in long-distance running or sexual masochism. It is a pleasant-feeling endogenous painkiller, which gives one a feeling of invincibility and accomplishment for about an hour. I believe the self-righteous neoliberal mindset can be mostly explained as a higher than (racial) average set point for general endorphin release, so that shitlibs feel a greater desire for endorphin chasing than other neurotransmitters.

In cultural terms, endorphin chasing would correspond to a high national average on the care/harm moral axis in Jonathon Haidt’s breakdown. In praxeological terms, we can think of neurotransmitter chasing (dopamine chasing, acetylcholine chasing, etc) as a priori values which are preferred more or less at different times based on existing levels. So a high average dopamine chaser might obtain a high level of dopamine, acquire a case of ennui, and choose to fix their acetylcholine deficiency for a while instead of chasing marginal gains in dopamine.

The six a priori values in Haidt’s book are Care, Fairness, Liberty, Loyalty, Authority, and Sanctity. Or, if you lean a bit autistic, you might prefer Kindness, Honesty, Laughter, Generosity (:=noblesse oblige), Loyalty (:=Obedience to lawful Authority), and Magic (respectively). I don’t have strong opinions yet on which neurotransmitters are likely to correspond to each yet, but here are my guesses so far:

Care: Endorphins
Fairness: ???
Liberty: Acetylcholine
Loyalty: Oxytocin?
Authority: Cortisol?
Sanctity: ???

For an example of a hormonal set point, I’ll use testosterone. In my experience with different levels of testosterone, the most pronounced difference is in the relative directness of my attitude and behavior. Under the influence of testosterone, I was much more focused on getting what I wanted and every other consideration could go to hell as far as I cared. But even though my directness was comparable to a black man’s, my behavior was very different because I was chasing different neurotransmitters. Rather than signalling my pimp cred to females (“Hey baby you got a cigarette?”) I would signal a combined Alpha/Beta status, as is typical in hwite courtship (ref: Athol Kay).

To understand these set points in absolute vs. relative terms, consider for the moment an MBTI example. My mom is an ISFJ relative to her racial group, but compared to the racial averages for purebred homo sapiens sapiens (ESFP) she isn’t very S or very F. So compared to their average, she would be IntJ, where the I and J are even more pronounced than before.

Advertisements

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Neuroglandular theory of personality (and racial culture)

  1. Koanic says:

    Thanks to KMAA shift I can actually understand the meta-logic behind these posts now.

    It’s much more straightforward than I thought.

  2. Edenist Whackjob says:

    “In my experience with different levels of testosterone, the most pronounced difference is in the relative directness of my attitude and behavior. Under the influence of testosterone, I was much more focused on getting what I wanted and every other consideration could go to hell as far as I cared.”

    Every proposition has a frame, a way to view it, which makes it make sense. “Getting what I want” makes sense from the T perspective – you will get mental movies and justifications to make that make sense. If you were lower T, you’d have a harder time getting that frame to “click”.

    This might be what Ortega y Gasset meant by “vital reason”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s