Unexamined premises are the truth's nemesis

The ideas you don’t question rule your mind; the ideas you can’t question rule your society. What’s hardest to change shapes systems most. If you don’t like where you are, question the fundamental beliefs that got you there
4
5
58
1,309
RT @levelsio: Same with this article from yesterday Gay acceptance is now rapidly dropping in the Netherlands The real reason is Middle E…
436
151
Germany's PISA score rises 41 points if you exclude immigrant kids. Switzerland: +30. The UAE's score drops 45 points without immigrants. Singapore, Macao, the UAE, and Qatar recruit immigrants smarter than their native populations; Europe, the opposite
78
910
5,743
344,858
A new study further supports my Universalism-Tribalism conceptualization. Cultures historically defined as collectivist are instead tribal cultures where one's duties and responsibilities are toward family and friends rather than toward society as a whole. As such, people from tribal cultures tend to be more willing to lie to help a friend and less willing to return a lost wallet to help a stranger
36
97
609
37,243
↘️
The individualism–collectivism dimension is a misnomer because individualists (green) tend to cooperate with anyone (large-scale cooperation), while collectivists (yellow, orange) tend to cooperate with family (small-scale cooperation). Universalism–tribalism is a better name
1
39
2,251
Vampires aren’t imaginary, they’re the people who suck life out of you
4
8
111
2,894
Economists and politicians love to say, “Immigrants from this low-trust country have high salaries; therefore, they are good for the economy,” but the same argument could be made about the success of psychopaths. Psychopathy is adaptive in a frequency-dependent fashion. The fewer psychopaths there are in a human system, the more adaptive psychopathy is because victims don’t suspect it as much. Make the system full of psychopaths, and everyone’s performance gets worse. In the same way, low-trustworthiness immigrants tend to do reasonably well in the high-trust West. Conversely, when together in their ancestral homelands, they tend to live amid corruption and poverty. Individual performance is insufficient proof of collective benefit. The question is not merely how individuals perform within a given system, but how they affect the systems they inhabit. And data from the last 500 years of human migration show that it’s the people more than the place that explain countries’ socioeconomic outcomes. There is no magic soil. Select your neighbors wisely
22
182
1,361
71,564
The problem with Entropic Altruists controlling AI is that they will weave kind lies into the fabric of social reality, and kind lies make systems dysfunction. Dysfunction means your life gets worse. This happens because their model of what makes countries functional or corrupt, rich or poor, is wrong. Their understanding is based on the Acemoglu institutions model. This model predicts that sustained immigration from perpetually poor and corrupt countries would have no lasting ill effects on the quality of institutions. Data say otherwise. The truth about advanced civilization is that it ultimately depends on people with the traits conducive to large-scale cooperation, and that disposition is not evenly distributed around the world. Rather, people high in honesty toward strangers, cognitive ability, and patience are most commonly found among populations shaped by millennia of cold winters and agricultural history. Cooperate with non-kin or die. I love my psychologically exceptional tropical kings and queens, and many of them love me back, but mass unselected immigration from their ancestral homelands would tilt the West toward small-scale cooperation and, thus, corruption and lower living standards. Contra Acemoglu, the sum of the evidence shows that people shape institutions more than institutions shape people. Just as bottlenecks rule manufacturing, Meijer’s Law rules human systems. What’s slowest and hardest to change—biology, psychology, culture—shapes human systems most because everything else is built on top of it. You can’t build a liberal democracy on top of tribal dispositions. It has been tried many times and failed every time. If you don't anchor yourself in reality, you will optimize for entropy, regardless of how altruistic you purport yourself to be
35
147
815
12,975
Something I’ve heard twice on dates lately is women saying they don’t need a man. Such a turnoff. What am I here for? I feel like we should need each other to some extent, no? What if the birthrate crisis is simply men and women not needing each other anymore
69
12
754
18,217
Flock cameras are cool for forcing people from shame cultures to behave, as they mostly respond to external force rather than an internal moral compass. But the day shame-culture people control institutions, they’ll control you
6
16
239
5,679
House parties are the best because the dregs can’t get in. Every functional human system has [had] some level of selection: successful countries, companies, universities, pleasant gyms, friend groups. Only liberal democracies think they can dispense with selection and still function
13
33
627
14,353
The trick leftists use to deceive you (and, most importantly, themselves) is to focus solely on proximal causes rather than intermediate and distal causes. Leftists do so because proximal causes look plausibly environmental, and the solution to environmental problems is more power to themselves. In truth, the modern environment is strongly influenced by genetics. It is one of the most replicable within-country findings in behavioral genetics. It is also what the between-country economic data show from 500 years of human migration. As for the ancestral environment, it shaped population genetics at a time when the environment was less malleable than genes. In economics, this leftist trick translates into Acemoglu winning the 2024 Nobel Prize for the idea that institutions [proximal cause] are the fundamental cause of wealth, even while the Committee for the Nobel Prize acknowledges that his empirical strategy cannot disentangle the effects of inclusive institutions from the independent effects of the European settlers' human capital [intermediate cause]. The truth is that populations with the biopsychological traits conducive to large-scale cooperation, such as honesty toward strangers, cognitive ability, and patience, tend to be better at developing strong institutions and thus richer. It used to be that we could tell the truth in academia, but leftist capture means we now need to post on X
18
185
1,431
25,611
If what people value most is to live in great social conditions, doesn’t it follow that those who contribute most to those great social conditions have greater moral worth?
11
9
118
3,469
A couple of months ago, I read a few pages of Peter Thiel's book Zero to One, and something stuck with me. He talks about how a perfectly competitive market is one you don't want to be in because your efforts are high and your rewards low. Well, it seems to me that much of the youth's complaints about today's society could be traced back to this dynamic. Damn-near every waking hour is spent competing for something, and often for worse rewards than their parents received. Got to eat healthy and hit the gym to looksmax, got to jestermax on dating apps, got to go to nice places to improve your social media, got to get an advanced degree and contract debt to have an ok job, got to bring your cognitive A-game to work, got to bring your sexual A-game the first time, got to be funnier than her options, got to manage your sleep and recovery to compete better. None of this is mandatory, and some of it is not unique to our time, but both the reward for competing well and the penalty for competing badly are greater than ever. So you kind of have to compete. As Michel Houellebecq famously observed in his 1994 novel Whatever, liberalism is the extension of competition to every domain of life. Infinite optionality means zero loyalty, and zero loyalty means infinite competition. I suspect that some of the youth's inclination toward socialism is longing for some respite, even as the long-term effect of the remedy might be worse than the disease
117
434
5,017
264,241
One reason why smart people seem increasingly concentrated on the opposite side of Wokism is that the intelligence required to detect deception tends to be greater than the intelligence required to enact deception. In some plant–pollinator systems, plants advertise a reward such as nectar or pollen but provide nothing, exploiting pollinators that approach expecting a mutually beneficial exchange. It requires no new mental ability on the part of the plant but requires growing powers of discrimination in its pollinators, such as bees and butterflies. In much the same way, Wokes mimic benevolence to deceive you into working for their own benefit. Smart, capable people are increasingly noticing and choosing otherwise
22
112
1,007
16,036