It's a joke; "your relationship to government" and "the public order". Doing some reading or actual observation about the people being discussed - he's "typical minding" them to an insane degree. Everything swallowed up by refusal to engage with the real implications of HBD
-
-
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @17cShyteposter
The people don't need to be consciously thinking in pompous terms of "the public order" in order for the model to more-or-less fit; quantitative group trait diffs can be small enough to not affect the basic logic of civilization and universal human naturehttps://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Cyj6wQLW6SeF6aGLy/the-psychological-unity-of-humankind …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zackmdavis @17cShyteposter
"Universal human nature" is a joke because humans aren't a single species. These are people whose ancestors didn't live in cities and don't have a conception of the basic logic of civilization - no ancestral history in civitas
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @17cShyteposter
Adaptation to cities (
@gcochran99's 10K year explosion) is just ("just") selecting on standing variation (http://unremediatedgender.space/2020/Apr/book-review-human-diversity/#standing-variation …), not enough time for new complex functional adaptations (argument in grandparent link). Implications for present-day sociology are not obvious!1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Good reading (as always) at the link Selection on variation doesn't say much about its the power. Changing the criteria for mating success directly - which is what cities did - is very powerful Veblen saw it enough to id it but it fully dominates the mating of the other speciespic.twitter.com/mK5rxvs1jb
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
"There were plenty of good-doing boys [...] aiming toward a straight life. But they were out of it in their own community" suggests that the "spurious aristocracy" system is partially a matter of local cultural incentives. (Actual HBD isn't strawman genetic determinism!)
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Sure; but look at the whole quote - those boys are low status and stay that way *unless whites impose white cultural norms* on those neighborhoods - entirely artificial. The genes of those boys are rapidly disappearing under current conditions.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I see.
More generally (as a rationalist, I have NO interest in specific cases, and ESPECIALLY not politically-sensitive ones; I can ONLY articulate the GENERAL laws) populations are more predictable than individuals because of the law of large numbers. 1/22 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zackmdavis @CovfefeAnon and
Ideals of egalitarianism (it's Bad if a group is "doing better" than others) and non-imperialism (it's Bad for a group to impose its will on others) are in conflict, because "doing better" can't be separated from way-of-life: cash transfers to hunter-gatherers wouldn't help. 2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
It's more that the art is seeing the big picture from the specific; making good inferences in areas where there can be no good statistical data. The big picture is that the "slow life history" types are being bred out in that society. 1/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
This isn't a data vs theory case but a case where the only data is non-quantifiable or quantifiable only on proxies and to even come up with the right proxies you need to have a good understanding of social forces so you know where to look. 2/2
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.