35 Comments

  1. You should make this a permanent page here like my own About Me page.

    About the libertarian thing:

    Seems to fit you pretty well.

    On the pessimism thing:

    The glass is half full and half empty: A population-representative twin study testing if optimism and pessimism are distinct systems (they are)

    Reply

  2. @robert – “Still surprised you’re agnostic and not atheist :)”

    well, i just think/feel that we can’t know — not from where we’re sitting.

    for instance, what if there is a god, and he is omnipotent. then he could hide himself from us. *hbd chick shrugs shoulders*

    ftr, my gut tells me there is no god, but there’s something in my head that makes me cautious about going with that instinct.

    Reply

  3. @jayman – “You should make this a permanent page here like my own About Me page.”

    i’ve run out of pages! (i.e. the tabs at the top on this wp theme are limited. =/ ) i was thinking of adding a link to this to the “hbd chick?” page, tho. (^_^)

    Reply

  4. bravo!

    “my least favorite traits of mine are that i’m low on conscientiousness and high on neuroticism”

    that’s funny b/c my least favorite traits are i’m HIGH on conscientiousness! (& also high on neuroticism:) ah, the grass is always greener. thank you for such personal & even inspirational posts.

    Reply

  5. @panjoomby – “thank you for such personal & even inspirational posts.”

    oh, you’re welcome! and thanks for calling it inspirational. (*^_^*)

    Reply

  6. I know you said that’s all you’re gonna share but one minor additional pair of questions: married? kids? Inquiring minds want to know.

    Even that aside, great post. Thanks for the blogging.

    Reply

  7. I’m trying to understand what are the causes of Misdreavus to, I would not say ” accept ”, but in addition, give us to understand that their sexual condition is cause for self hatred and as a consequence for him to believe or internalize only homosexuality (read, male and exclusive) is caused dryly, by pathogen infection.
    Well, I had never said it before here, but I think the most perceptive here have already been questioned (if ever I was the target of their curiosity in their minds, I doubt … the people here are always trying to understand what I wrote … before trying to understand my ideas). I ‘am’ ‘gay’ ‘. Well, I hope that anyone who personally know me is reading this my outburst.
    I do not like to use these terms, especially in my case, I’m not strongly inclined to this condition, if not i was a transsex. I’m very well and very happy with my overall identity, including my sexual condition, albeit with increased self-consciousness, we tend to become very self critical. And after ” long ” self deception, I took for myself what I am and have always been.

    We have some scenarios.

    If homosexuality, and only it, is pathogenic, then there is a spectral discontinuity of human sexuality, where the rest is ” natural ” and homosexuality is pathogenic.

    This is the scenario proposed by Cochran and co.

    ‘My’ scenario is that there is no discontinuity but only a difference in pathogen load. Homosexuals have an excess of ” pathogens ” related to sexuality that constantly would change your way of thinking in these terms. Sexuality is itself the result of ancient interaction ” pathogenic ”. So I do not believe my homosexuality is the result of an external infection, that is, what happened outside the womb, but from conception, when sperm from my father mated with the egg from my mother. I’m slightly skeptical about the idea of ​​epigenetics in utero without predisposition or previous vulnerabilities.

    I also think that homosexuality or the spectrum of human sexuality can be explained based on the sensitivity of the erogenous zones where in the case of male homosexuality, anal area would be more intensely touch (one of the erogenous areas of the body man). Our brain looks at the world and try to categorize our perceptions from innate knowledge (dualistic) prior. Pleasure, pain, a face in the lunar soil, Jesus in the wood of a tree, etc …

    I’m not ashamed of me, I’m pretty self confident, and perhaps this narcissism is one of my boards salvation. Without my narcissism I would have killed me, not necessarily because of homosexuality, but because of my hyper sensitivity. Both conditions are related but are not the same. People always do everything wrong, and I’m already tired of it, ordinary people are irresponsible and I do not want to continue holed up in their midst to prove this insecurity. I’m afraid of them.

    I think if I really did not like my homosexuality, I think as Misdreavus. But I like, that is, it’s not that I like, but it’s part of me, and especially from now, is inseparable. That does not mean you do not feel attracted to women, but it’s because I’m so rational to understand women’s subjective mind I’ve given up trying. Strangely, women are more attracted to me, they tend to be more masculine.

    I think. I have personal motives to try to understand this theory, which can have very serious social consequences, just as the market eugenics that many want to impose, without thinking that ordinary people are idiots. They will not choose the philosopher or scientist highly empathic, they can even choose from, but then they’ll throw them in orphanages or prefer the types of intelligent they are good to make money or ‘charismatic smart’ ‘they like. Ordinary people love celebrities.

    But I am not alone, because Misdreavus, jayman and Cochran also have their respective non-neutral personal motivations for engaging in the exposition of this theory. Try as we might be neutral, none of us can be completely neutral in any matter. This human type, or existential type does not exist.

    Reply

  8. And you are very charming. Must be a special talent. Speaking of which, why don’t we hear more about talents in the hbd-o-sphere?

    About childhood religiousity: my parents were atheists (actually just Mother, Daddy was a comfortable agnostic) but my grandmother was very religious (Congregationalist) who would take us (my twin brother and I) to Sunday school whenever she was in town. I remember one time when the Sunday school teachers were telling us twelve-year-olds about heaven and hell. A little voice inside my head said to me, “Ha ha, the idea of heaven is totally ridiculous.” To which it added, “You better hope there’s no hell!”

    When my grandmother gave me the money to go to college she made me promise that I would believe in God, something I was unable to do. But I have spent the rest of my life in a tortured search for God or some moral equivalent of God which might at least have some possibility of existing, given everything we know about history and that science knows about the world and the universe we live in (I’m really big on science, absolutely love physics).

    The best I’ve been able to come up with is that pleasure and pain (and all their modulations: beauty, horror, ecstasy, terror, love, hate, and everything in between) are correlative phenomena (ie, not independent of each other) in which case their might be a symmetry between them such that they just balance out in the end. For instance, a person who has suffered privation all their life may have built up a potential (in their brain!) for a beautiful experience in the future, if only in the moment when their brain disintegrates. (Simile: you can’t destroy a capacitor without discharging it.).

    We certainly know that our brains build such potentials: think of the joy or sadness a simple piece of information can trigger when you hear a piece of news about a loved one. And I like the way Pope in his Essay on Man writes about how rich people who seem to have it all may suffer from boredom (time lays heavily on their hands) and all sorts of other problems: all is not as it seems from the outside.

    Anyway, my definition of God is the fairest and most beautiful possible thing given everything we know. And I only give it a 50 percent chance of being true.

    Reply

  9. @santoculto

    ordinary people are idiots

    Those of us on the left side of the curve are playing the hand we were dealt and should not be disparaged because of our fate. The many social and political problems of the current age (one could say for all time) are the product and responsibility of the right side. We peons are doing what we do best and are holding up our side of the equation. Any failure of society will be the responsibility of the right side just as they deserve the credit for the “advancements” of many millennia. People who think that the “problem” is the left side of the curve need to re-evaluate exactly where they think they fall on that curve. If the problem is that the left side is mucking things up then the right side needs to re-arrange the furniture.

    Reply

  10. @Cracker1 – “Those of us on the left side of the curve are playing the hand we were dealt and should not be disparaged because of our fate. The many social and political problems of the current age (one could say for all time) are the product and responsibility of the right side. We peons are doing what we do best and are holding up our side of the equation. Any failure of society will be the responsibility of the right side just as they deserve the credit for the “advancements” of many millennia. People who think that the “problem” is the left side of the curve need to re-evaluate exactly where they think they fall on that curve. If the problem is that the left side is mucking things up then the right side needs to re-arrange the furniture.”

    Well said, Cracker1. Personally I care about the happiness and well-being of dumb and the clueless. But then at one stage in my life I was plunged down into their midst (don’t ask why) and I found them to be, the overwhelming majority, kind, sympathetic, honest, hard-working human beings. I think Charles Murray’s theory of why so few in our political class don’t feel the same way (see his discussion of meritocracy in the Bell Curve) is the only explanation that makes sense. My solution? It’s in the last chapter of my new book: http://goo.gl/C4k2H7

    Reply

  11. Misdreavus must be honest with yourself. If you can not get a relationship with a woman on his own and think would be happy (something tells me that he is not happy with yourself) if it was heterosexual, then he specify his condition. Misdreavus, his uncritical subservience to pathogenic unilateral theory of male et exclusive homosexuality, is not and will not be shared by many of his peers, including this person who writes it.
    Always important to specify and contextualize not to

    commit injustices

    and

    talk as if representing any one class.

    Believe that genetic heredity has to be given only from a logical parameter is stupidity. Complex phenotypes are not as simple phenotypes, capisce !!

    I also wonder if you are really gay and non-white, as it says it is. How can I be sure if I’ve never seen his face and does not know you. This is the problem of being in an environment where there are many personal agendas, contrary to honesty, hard and objective, which should predominate.

    Reply

  12. @Luke Lea

    “. … I found them to be, the overwhelming majority, kind, sympathetic, honest, hard-working human beings”

    Conscious acknowledgment of reality is desirable but is not a virtue.

    “Personally I care about the happiness”

    Most people, regardless of their intellectual achievements and abilities, want to define and pursue their own version of happiness. I think it would be much too complex for us to concern ourselves with the happiness of individuals not to mention presumptuous . What the left side needs is a place at the table. A place that provides the opportunity to obtain the minimum of the essentials in food, clothing and shelter and which comes with the same dignity of existence that all are entitled.

    Using language like this

    “and well-being of dumb and the clueless”

    indicates to me that your solution will fail.

    Reply

  13. ”@santoculto

    ordinary people are idiots

    Those of us on the left side of the curve are playing the hand we were dealt and should not be disparaged because of our fate. The many social and political problems of the current age (one could say for all time) are the product and responsibility of the right side. We peons are doing what we do best and are holding up our side of the equation. Any failure of society will be the responsibility of the right side just as they deserve the credit for the “advancements” of many millennia. People who think that the “problem” is the left side of the curve need to re-evaluate exactly where they think they fall on that curve. If the problem is that the left side is mucking things up then the right side needs to re-arrange the furniture.”

    Cracker,

    Contrary to what many of you here think, I do not believe this linearity that the distribution of scores on a bell curve want to display. Well, I live all the time with people from different cognitive strains and can tell you that I do not believe all ‘those who are on the left side of the bell curve’ ‘, are conclusively speaking of idiots.

    First, I think we all carry the stupidity and intelligence with us. Therefore, we are all at certain levels, stupid and clever. I know many people that you played, and correctly, because I left that impression, my fault, that despite its clear cognitive disadvantages for example in vocabulary size showed extremely valuable psychological characteristics.

    Contrary to what you might think, I’m not the typical smart snob, first because I do not believe it has a very high IQ, maybe at some subtest, but on average, my technical intelligence (which is what you guys give more value) It is at best, average. Second, because I believe in cognitive diversity, where there will be many qualitative and quantitative subtypes smart. Third, because I’m really worried and hatred for intelligent without character or moral discernment. This plague is currently destroying Western civilization.

    When I mentioned the common or ordinary people, I wanted to refer to exactly those Hbd Chick exemplified in one of his texts, on their intelligence. Yes, there are many, many people who HAVE a high intelligence, especially the technical type, but ARE NOT smart. To be smart, you must live the intelligence, in other words, have an intelligent personality. And most people I know HAVE a high intelligence, they do not seem TO BE smart.

    Think of a person who uses their more developed technical skills to succeed in life, but that during his everyday is a complete prole.

    But the fact is that even these virtuous people I know, if they were put to ” produce ” their children, of course, which would have a tendency to do it through the contextual criteria that prevail in our societies, a child who be good to make money, demonstrate artificial charisma …

    I have not been well understood, forgive me, I did not refer to all ” those on the left side of the bell curve ” like idiots. Maybe it did so, but was based on the heat of the moment. I’m being very sincere, because as I said, I know extremely brave individuals who do not have a great intellect. And I’d rather be with them than with most pretentious idiots who have above average intelligence, who do nothing to help others who deserve to be helped and can not understand the basics of the real world, these are the people who irritate me.

    Reply

  14. HBDchick you are torturing me and it’s NOT MORAL.

    I AM ONE OF YOUR GREATEST FAN AND I NEED TO KNOW YOUR AGE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE !!!!!!

    Please have some pitty :(

    Reply

  15. @polynices – “I know you said that’s all you’re gonna share but one minor additional pair of questions: married? kids? Inquiring minds want to know.”

    happily married! (^_^) with the same guy now for…omg…21 years!! (which should go some way in answering your age question, cale ba.) we haven’t been married that whole time, but may as well have been. =P

    i’ve got a policy of not talking about my immediate family on the innerwebs. i’ll tell you all about my crazy extended family, and maybe one or two things about the d.h., but the rest is…hush-hush!

    Reply

  16. @santoculto

    It is gratifying to know that I misunderstood your use of idiot. I use the term myself and I am thinking of using fool in its place. Fools seem to be randomly distributed within any group whether based on IQ or some other measure.

    “Third, because I’m really worried and hatred for intelligent without character or moral discernment. This plague is currently destroying Western civilization.”

    I agree. I keep hoping that it is some sort of temporary phenomenon, but the longer it goes on the more pessimistic I become. It is not like we only recently discovered that greed is toxic to individuals and societies.

    I disagree with some of your comments on IQ. Keep reading J. Thompson and the links that he provides (as will I). We can’t force morality and virtue into the measurement of IQ.

    Most people agree that just because one is physically bigger and stronger it does not make it okay to take their money. OTOH most say it is okay to take their money if you are smarter than they are. Few understand the commonality of the two.

    Reply

  17. ”It is gratifying to know that I misunderstood your use of idiot. I use the term myself and I am thinking of using fool in its place. Fools seem to be randomly distributed within any group whether based on IQ or some other measure.”

    Cracker,
    I do not see big difference between fool and idiot. But are words, much depends on the context. My context in relation to the idiot, was based on the idea that ordinary people tend to make choices that relate to contextual advantages and therefore in a dystopian scenario of market eugenics, they mostly do not will select the truly intelligent . And the truly intelligent, through a very complex social context characterized human social environments need to be cooperative. The high proportion of alpha men and sociopaths or psychopathic in some populations explain half the problems of these groups, such as Africa. Just think of the African dictators and all African men who want to take advantage with the ” royalty ”.

    ”I agree. I keep hoping that it is some sort of temporary phenomenon, but the longer it goes on the more pessimistic I become. It is not like we only recently discovered that greed is toxic to individuals and societies.”

    Cracker,
    I do not think this is a temporary phenomenon, as always happened. 3 years ago I was strongly inclined to accept social hierarchy based on my implicit racism, especially by the Brazilian context.

    But now, I’m becoming more inclined to reject it, not the hierarchy itself, but the way it is organized, absolutely wrong. The simple fact that there are ” royal families ” of ” blue blood ”, shows us that humanity is much more primitive than we thought.

    What is happening today is not a random phenomenon, although on the surface, appear and manifest in this way. The causes for Western decadence lie within the civilization itself within each individual.

    For example, I do not see how the White Nationalism can succeed. They are very naive, the minimum for someone who really understands how the dirty game of politics, it would be, or be a psychopath (or be within the range of antisocial personality) or have read any book of Macchiavelli.

    ”disagree with some of your comments on IQ. Keep reading J. Thompson and the links that he provides (as will I). We can’t force morality and virtue into the measurement of IQ.

    Most people agree that just because one is physically bigger and stronger it does not make it okay to take their money. OTOH most say it is okay to take their money if you are smarter than they are. Few understand the commonality of the two.”

    Cracker,
    I do not disagree entirely on IQ tests but I think it’s much more complex than that. I like or am enjoying talking about the 3 ity. Complexity, diversity and contextuality.

    I do not think Gardner’s theory is wrong. Certainly, the policy based on trying to mitigate racial inequality capacity that is embedded within this theory is wrong, purposely or not, but it is.

    Since the human being is a very complex and especially at the highest levels, then there will be a tendency of cognitive composition variation, where different sub-groups will have different strengths and weaknesses. Its complexity is the result of their greater cognitive diversity or specialization. I do not deny, of course, that there are real differences, palatable, among intellects, but I believe that these differences are not as linear as many of you are believing.

    IQ tests, school tests, were made by teachers, psychological, psychometricians. Clearly there is a bias, based on the perspective of these groups trying to impose on the rest of his methods and conclusions are superior to others. The teacher tends to consider the gifted high achiever, as the pinnacle of human intellect. People are influenced by their professions (which tends to express their cognitive compositions) to conceptualize and determine the intelligence.

    The perspective of teachers, psychologists and psychometricians is not wrong, just biased. The intelligence is not like a bell curve. As I wrote in my blog, you guys are analyzing the distribution of intelligence through, metaphorically speaking, of a bell curve, just as astronauts analyze the Earth, where has the impression that the Earth’s surface is flat.

    Most psychometricians agree that IQ tests are not as reliable to analyze the intellect in individuals than in relation to coletivities. But it should also not be analyzed in this way, since depending on the test and the individual, the correlation can be almost perfect. This area has a great horizon of development but I see ill will and a tendency to judge that everything so far produced is enough, when I see clearly what is not.

    The contextuality as the culture and methods that are used to provide meritocracy, has a significant effect on societies, since depending on which emphasis that culture gives some very capable types may be at risk are being discarded. And they are.

    For example, to select people for a profession, they are used for multiple choice tests rather than objectively analyze the ability of these people to learn the guidelines of the required profession. There is no objectivity.

    Just as our society produces industrial products on a large scale, rather than the handmade product, which is worked (this that has gained value in the market recently), we are doing the same thing with people. To select the best, you should do so based on objective and individual assessment.

    We are using blind tests of real ability and morality to select the people who decide on our lives. And yes, the moral discernment capacity is critical. Why do you think that Western nations have reached this situation **

    Surely the fact in Rotherham, was not handled by people with moral discernment. I believe that this capability really relates to mental age with character maturing, and many people ” of ” high IQ ” simply do not have this valuable trait.

    Reply

  18. I don’t get why you said “and I am not eastern european AND I don’t like authoritarianism”. It’s not like being eastern european means you like authoritarianism and vice versa.

    Reply

  19. @szopeno – “It’s not like being eastern european means you like authoritarianism and vice versa.”

    not automatically in every individual in eastern europe, no. but there are some indications that, yes, authoritarianism — in particular left-wing authoritarianism — has much more support in eastern europe than in the west. in fact, it almost doesn’t register in the west. (right-wing authoritarianism does, however.) i mentioned authoritarianism in the companion “know thyself” post, that’s why i brought it up here again. see also this previous post.

    i don’t remember the percentages for poland, though, and i haven’t got the time to check them just now, but i’d bet they’re a lot lower than further east — russia, moldova, etc.

    my inclusion of authoritarianism and being western or eastern european was really for the benefit of some individuals i know on twitter. there are quite a few guys there with eastern european heritage who would prefer some sort of authoritarian system (absolute monarchy or whatever) to a democratic one. just making it clear that i’m not one of them. (~_^) (although i do appreciate some of their arguments!)

    Reply

  20. one thing that i think is probably clannish about me is that i will very quickly, really without thinking, jump in to defend someone who i feel is part of my group.

    Same here. As you know I’m also clannish.

    iq: 125? 130? not a genius, but not terribly dumb, either.

    Approximately same.

    personality traits? (see here and here.) i’m pretty to very open to experiences; low-ish on conscientiousness (have i not emailed you back yet? now you know why.); introverted, believe it or not (treat me gently!); low to average on agreeableness (does this account for my contrarian nature?); high on neuroticism/emotionality; high on honesty-humility. all in all, i’m a strange cookie!

    Identical! (Though I don’t know about honesty-humility, don’t recall that being measured on the Big 5 personality tests you see floating around on the Internet).

    Fairly aspie with tendency to overorganize stuff, something you evidently suffer from as well (look how many tags you use per post. I also used to have like 20-50 tags per blog post until I made an effort to restrain myself).

    My religious views are complex but ultimately reduce to agnosticism. my family has been agnostic or culturally-Orthodox-but-agnostic-in-practice (i.e. like most Russians) for generations. You’d pretty much have to go back to those born in Tsarist times to get people with strong, genuine, and implacable religious beliefs.

    I don’t think I am psychopathic. I don’t wish people ill, or at least try not to, but I do have a problem connecting with people emotionally and upholding the petty proprieties demanded of by mainstream society. Kind of like Meursault in The Stranger. (Yes was into existentialism as a teen too LOL).

    i am not eastern european and i DON’T like the idea of authoritarianism, left or right. not one. little. bit.

    And that is perhaps where we diverge somewhat. Well I don’t like authoritarianism either, especially if it’s implemented by stupid people. And I certainly don’t want it to apply to myself. But at a rational and non personal level I acknowledge that for some societies, especially the less intelligent and more clannish ones, it is probably the most rational and even humane political choice.

    Reply

  21. KNITTING! Here’s one, from a String Addict reader.

    How do you hold your needles? Were you shown this, or did you figure it out on your own? Which kind(s) of needles do you prefer (straights, circulars, dpns, other)? Do you have a handedness with your knitting?

    I have an entirely HBD-related and very precise (and cool) reason for asking. E-mail me if you wish, but I’ll try to remember to check back here.

    Reply

  22. @needles – “I have an entirely HBD-related and very precise (and cool) reason for asking.”

    oh! knitting+hbd?! this is more exciting than even dancing+hbd. (~_^)

    ok: i knit english style — that’s how my mother and grandmother taught me. (i can do continental style, and yes it is faster, but i like my traditions (~_^) ). i’m right-handed so i “throw” the yarn with my right hand — and i don’t do it efficiently, either — i move my right hand A LOT. (*^_^*)

    i prefer either straight needles or dpn (when knitting socks), and i like to plant the *end* of the needle that’s being worked (the left needle in a pair) hard against my rib-cage. that’s something i developed myself (altho i know other people do the same) — no one showed me that.

    i’m a “tight” knitter, too, if that makes any difference. (^_^) so, all things considered, takes me FOREVER to knit something. (*^_^*)

    Reply

  23. @hbd chick I love your blog. I must say though, that your Irish ancestors must be turning in their graves hearing you describe yourself as “very much a creature of the British Isles”. It’s an outdated term used chiefly by British colonial types (and their unionist brethren) and is now avoided by both the British and Irish governments (the term has no constitutional or legal basis in either jurisdiction). I could go on a rant about how the Irish are Gaels / Goidelic as opposed to being Britons / Brythonic but I think you know all that stuff already! Erin go Bragh!

    Reply

  24. Hey man,

    I’m following you wherever you go. Stop using my ID!

    Please ban the above person, IT’S NOT ME!

    Reply

  25. @lion of the judah-sphere – “Please ban the above person, IT’S NOT ME!”

    hmmm. well, he does have a slightly different user name (JUDAS-sphere) than yours, but that is confusing, i agree.

    @judas-sphere – i’ve dropped you into the moderation basket now to keep an eye on your comments, just to let you know. don’t try to pass yourself off as lion of the judah-sphere here or i will ban you.

    Reply

  26. Have you ever taken any dna tests? Like 23andme or something else?

    I’m planning to take one hoping it would reveal even more about me, even though I know that some parts of my ancestors have lived in the same area for hundreds of years :)

    Reply

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s