Skip to content


My first love was buried;;
– over a tall shaded tree…

My second love was so very;;
– great a distance; from she.

A dimly glow, Just out of sight;;
– Until the looking glass made her bright.
Then finally the morning star;;
– my love number 3
did quickly come and carry off;;
– all the star light I see.

Under blue, now out of reach;;
Just like the stars are to me.


What We Know! – What we Hate? and what we Understand…

Hatred was one of my early, if not first puzzles when i started.
Groups of people form under segregating identities, in order to preserve the collective emotional state, of status-quo;well-being.

I realized there were two kinds of hatred in culture
– against those who [do know]
– and against those [who do not know]

Those who [know] [one thing]
and those who are ignorant to whatever that [thing] is. .

Sounds like a circle doesnt it?
Little like semantic nonsense?
Let me say it another way…

a) The more you understand something
b) The less possible it is to hate them.

1.) baby crying on a plane; damn that’s annoying – why don’t you run over there and just throw it?
— > Because you understand it hasn’t made the conscious choice to interrupt your sleep.
** But thats hyper simple stuff, lets one up…

2.) A man has been breaking into your apartment most nights
you know this because you find food missing and scraps everywhere – you think it is a prank; then learn of his identity.

–> having lost part of his brain to cancer- he sleepwalks.
** Still, way too easy… come up to my level..

3.) A serial rapist nay child rapist.

The most evil and hated thing, most people believe they can imagine.
There is no redemption for those who prey on the innocent, for sexual pleasure, of all things…. You hate them right?


What if I told you…
because of a defect, there is a compulsion to action that is more powerful than a heroin addiction?

— Where the parts of your brain that are supposed to pump chemicals to reward good social interaction and attention.

. have instead of inflicting you with guilt/dread in a situation- has flipped a 180
making what you think/know to be the most horrible things
become the most pleasurable and most powerful driving force inside of you.
… Like the worst drug addiction.

More powerful than any fear of punishment, and death.
What is more powerful than the will to survive?

Oh yes… the “Need to fuck”

yet Necessarily compelling, excessively primal
[Human] [Mating] [Drive]

Having mutated into a form that is neither [Hetero] nor [Homo] It is [Pedo]
or the attraction to prepubescent
# [as in before puberty, not “during”or “just after”]
or “Children”

Imagine it were you, and you’re afraid of it.
– You know if you tell anyone, you will be shunned, shamed, or worse…
So youre about driven mad by calling yourself horrible names in your head
Anything to self shame, and stay the urges.

“You sick fuck, stop looking at those kids. Yorure a pervert and going to hell”
→ The toll is massive
The personality degrades.
The constant state of paranoia gives way to new addictions to negative emotions, and all remaining socialization deteriorate.
A pattern of behavior emerges, but usually kill themselves long before that. Kinda like the gays at the “Pray away the gay” camps…

# # in History of deviant sexuality # #
…Have you ever heard the stories about gay lovers risking execution to “be” together, throughout rome, and before in babalon – to where the torah even mentions it.

-== That’s that necessary driving force to our sex drive. Thats how were not extinct; and expecting to “tame” it, is… well, folly.

<>Addiontally to satisfy the rest of you: not paying attention.<>

→ The difference is, of course consent.
The cognitive ability for Children to || see into || , and || plan || for the future is a very slow, hard process for them.
And its not until age ~25 that we really really peak.
> Which is why I hate seeing teens in Jail.
This is why you will never have to worry about a pedo-revolution.
No ]]NAMBLA[[ Takeover.
The Physical bility to consent (reached sooner in girls)
end up being the ultimate stop-gap for any potential social revolution to attempt to include this sexual deviancy acceptible. As the conservatives threaten will follow Gay marriage”

How much did you read?
How much do you understand?
How much do you hate?

Im not crazy… Im not crazy… im not crazy…

Thats insane….

Isnt it tho?
‘Crazy’, that is…

What is… crazy?
Can someone be crazy and know they are crazy
But then the definition of “Crazy” is to not understand reality, you would not know.

However, “sanity” and counter wise “insane”, are dependent on the social opinion of behaviors expressed to be [normal] and [abnormal], respectively.

When it comes to some behaviors that are destructive, I will happily side with the rest of the population in “wanting to do” something about it, but of course not for the same reasons.

When your sanity is defined by a [popular vote] You should be scared. When you consider all the things that people actually believe… your death would be nearly certain. Because surely, because you cant see “god”, you must be the odd one out, and if they dont kill you – they will be punished.

Needless to say- things can get out of hand.
For instance, ideological indifference: Which, ever so frequently the terms “delusional” and “psychopathic” pop up. Then theres my favorite and by “favorite”, note those are Sarcastic Quotes…
[The Dunning-Kruger Effect]

“call-outs” Let me explain that last one…
– The “Dunning-Kruger Effect” is the result of a study, where individualls thought they were [proficient] in a [skill/task: Knowledge] but in fact were tested and founded naught.

# Now the reason why this one in particular is especially irritating, is because of the proposed psychological mechanism (the whole program in the brain)
> Which is,
1. One would claim to have great knowledge about something
2. But they would be [unaware that they do not actually know] [all that much] about [said thing]
3. [and they cant figure out, (even when confronted) that they don’t know “what they are talking about”

I. Person makes a claim from fact.
II. Other person yells “Dunning-Kruger” and “You dont know what youre talking about”
III. In an attempt to disqualify the argument. Let me simplify it even more…

Person A: No I dont believe religion should be, the governing body, because anthropologically speaking – It has not worked: Or “has” in the sense that people still technically “lived” but under extreme duress.
– Examples in history include the rule of the holy roman catholic church, which used deities to ‘put the fear of god into them’ and you know what…
“God” knows everything you’re thinking…

> “Assassinate me! How dare you!”
> Oh… but you were thinking it – Off with his head!

Person B: I dont think you’re anthropologist – Sounds like we might have a [Dunning-Kruger Effect]

Thus – The subject A is “crazy”, dont listen to him.

These rather complicated Ad Hominem attacks will often result from debates, risen to conflict. This is in my opinion; A BIG FUCKING PROBLEM.

Moreover, for someone to accurately make that assessment, they have to have equal or greater knowledge with which to measure against… Think about it…
If you haven’t gotten it yet: Im saying they themselves posess the traits of this “effect”

When you take a look at the most bitter, cut and segregated political factions in these so called ‘United States’, and they for whatever reason feel no need nor will to seek truth… unless its convenient. This boggles me…

I will grant you: A single book, moreover a book of fiction; would be the easiest way to find an answer to a question that otherwise may or may not even be deserving of an answer – let alone can ‘have one’

…However… Science is “Insanity” ?

The scientific method, was a philosophy tried-and-true; In the sense that through it, we now have machines that think at the speed for 10,000,000 people per second (at least ‘math-wise’) that fit our pocket.

Because of the scientific method, we have medicine and its resulting 40 extra years of life. Many of you that are over 30… dont realize that at one time, you were roughtly the equivilent of a 80 year old man. Kinda like “dog years” but not really…

You would have been dead by getting eaten by a meat-eating elephant. Yes… yes they did exist, once upon time… in some universe.

Nonetheless… Science itself is starting to come under threat. Why is this? All the things science can do – and unfortunately, you cannot pick and choose from “Science” if there was a study that said something that you really- really dont like; Irrelevant. You have to respect the method. If you dont like it, prove it wrong. Granted: science is not supposed to be about proving others wrong because you don’t like the idea, but in fact, that is exactly where we are going; and when no evidence can be provided to the contrary, the emotional response ensues.
Now that is indeed and in a word: “Crazy”

When it comes to matters of faith, its not always about god, or a spirit or some lucky charm. It can also be an idea. Admittedly, I have a “faith” of sorts that the scientific method is the way to solve all problems. Because the scientific method AKA: Science. Is in fact the perfection of “asking questions” and all things that need an answer, must be first asked the right question. And to find the right question is to NOT close yourself off to possible question, you may not want to ask.

You dont want to save _________
You must be a psychopath…

Oh – There is again… Im a “psychopath” because I dont agree with you. Certainly you mean the violent type, correct? Because if you look on walstreet, you will notice a great deal of very rich individuals who could not (in truth) care less about the well being of people.

So we on the opposition, the scientific, have become the voices of- “crazy” We are no longer supposrted by the majoirty, because we have exceeded them so far… that we are unable to teach them.

We are unable to make them understand.

We are unable to protect them: From Both themselves and Us.
“God” indeed.
Only a “God” could save us now – And THATS… insane.

Im done writing now…
I blame you for the above.
Kindly go f*** yourselves. 

Socioeconomic Theory Explained to the Layman.

Socioeconomic Theory Explained to the Layman.


Not because you’re stupid.

But because you did not spend years in a classroom

To brag about learning big words
Big words that mean other words that everyone already knows.


Part 1: Play is a Social Technology


Socioeconomics from my own (personal and arguably anecdotal) observations something of a large word. Certainly one for dismissal to anyone who “does not care about that stuff” Also one of those words I feel somewhat guilty using. Not sure why.

The fascinating part, is of course, that [Sociology] being the science of how people interact; and [Economic Theory]: being the scientific application and study of, quite simply “how wealth and resources are exchanged in the world.” – and in those two concepts alone are the most major threads in the fabric of society.


What and how people “want to succeed” in the world is goverened by the acquisition of either


A. Great Wealth. (Money as a commodity)

B. Just enough wealth to survive. (money as a tool/social technology)


It makes me wonder: “What would people be, like or do if they did not have to chase wealth to survive?”

One answer to this question is “Laziness” In fact one I frequently get.


This answer, or in it, question of “laziness” makes me wonder the type of mind that would be and why would they be, just as so, “lazy”


What of children? Children could perhaps be the perfect example of individuals who exist in the world with (hopefully) very little cares for survival. Being that there parents are looking after them. So if this is the case – What is it children do with their lives?


→ Play


Play is the original social technology of learning. It is the act of “doing something” and being rewarded by your brains chemicals to reinforce the behavior.
→ Look at what children do, how they play.


A. Boys typically engage (or statistically lean) with toys and activities that involve development of spacial [bayesian inference*]


Boys can be found playing with all kinds of spacial, puzzle and physical – toys, games and of course… sports.
Now broken down…

  1. – The physical sport is a direct interaction that builds up the brains ability to navigate the environment and leverage physics.

  2. No doubt an ability we inherited from “monkeys” (Properly said: Apelike/Monkey-like) of which it was extremely important not to fall to your death while jumping from branch to branch.

  3. Whats more, this ability has mutated into the ability to learn and manipulate physics in objects (other than your self)

  4. Which in itself demonstrates an interesting ability to be able to cognitively place yourself in another perspective, from which to know the end result up.



But in this sense you have two brains:

1. One that is you interactive

2. One that is predicting interaction


These two combined allow you to [Act] in order to intentionally create a [Reaction] we call this [Cognitive Inference]

to be continued…


How to get more Women involved in Science.

Theory: Social reinforcement and intelligence.

The following is a compressed abstraction.
(Meaning, it is missing necessary grammar for the purpose of expediting the comprehension of people, specifically those with a short attention span.)

An Exploration on the predictive patterns of social feedback that is completely misunderstood by most hyper-liberal human rights denominations that refuse to do actual research before stating their own “Theories” about how society works, and why…
1. All Men
2. Only White men.
3. but not gay men.
4. Nor Trans men.

Are somehow oppressive and evil to women and society.
REF: Patriarchy.

–Established biology: Reward circuit = Humans will do what “they like to do”
#So established in all of biology. Animals are driven to do things that “feel good” because it helps them survive.
If they didnt enjoy them; They wouldnt do them.
–> And they would die…

–Established Psychology, Evolutionary psychology : Humans, being social animals, are heavily reinforced by social feedback.
# So established because we are interdependent on society, and others in order to promote our
1. Emotional well being.
2. Defense of our homes.
3. Ability to build things (by working together.)
4. Ability to raise children. (Because our children are completely useless, especially during early brain development)

Thinking: An action, equally subject to rewarding feedback.

A. Thinking and interest in learning is equally subject to social feedback. (peer reinforcement)
Then -> Less social, less socially apt individuals may be more likely to adopt personal interests that do not conform or are not reinforced by social feedback.

B. Counter-wise -> People who adopt more personal interests, as opposed to demonstrating interest in “socially popular interests” may be less likely to demonstrate social aptitude.

= Resulting…
Comprehension in complex matters, comes at sacrifice of social aptitude.

# Exceptions
A. – Forced learning: One pushes through courses defined as “Unbelievably boring” in order to achieve higher goal. (IE: Doctors)
A.-o –> As opposed to: One of interest in relevant study is likely to learn the same subject with far less effort.

>>– Established Gender psychology theory states: Females are more receptive to social feedback than males.
– Males: demonstrate more individualistic drives.

— Women – Will be less likely to take interest in subjects and tasks sparsely understood by and un-relatable to the relevant social collective.

— Men – Will be more likely to take interest in complex subjects and tasks sparsely understood by and un-relateable to the relevant social collective

Solution —> Making higher education as mandatory as learning language.
1. affordability.
2. Archaic teaching formats: “Lecturing”
3. Archaic teaching formats: Forced learning.
4. Archaic teaching formats: Non-interactive learning of complex subject matter (Physics) leaves most people unable to build intuitive learned responses.
5. Democracy: Ignorant by majority, ignorance should not be deciding what can or cannot be taught in schools.
#Lamespeak Translation: Stupid people voting, will choose stupid things. 

Incomplete paper on Evo-Psych and Gender behaviors: Human Learning Curve vs Sex.

1.) Firstly we start with evolution:

– Evolution involves adaptation. Through the pressures of either [natural] or [artificial selection]* the process results in biological changes over time that favor mutations according to the environmental factors relevant.

– Those who fail to thrive in the environment, thrive less in the environment or even do [only slightly worse that another competing species] will eventually be outbred or extinct; and the dominating trait will survive.

This is, in part, how the pattern of evolution and natural selection works.

2.) Now we move on to[Evolution] applied to [Behavior]
Explained and theorized in [Evolutionary Psychology]

With Relevance to [Neural biology]: Different parts of our brain have adapted to serve differing functions.

>> The Evolution of our brains occurred, evidently (in by comparison to other species) from the center out, building upon already present functions.

– From the core being critical autonomic functions
– To the surface cortical functions of [long term memory] and [logical assembly]

3.) Emotions = Primitive nature.

— Emotions define our [likes] and [dislikes]: Completing our brains “reward-circuit” and conditions some extended variables of our behavior. Those relevant to [Socialization]
— The same system also reinforces critical biological behavioral functions such as [Mating] critical due to the fact [Reproduction is necessary for survival]

The value of emotions can be confirmed on both sides, in part. Whether

  • [Bad] because of rage/anger/jealousy.
  • [Good] because of joy, love, compassion.

3.) Emotional Predispositions

Emotional predispositions can and are often conditioned into people. We could also call this [Stereotyping] As our encounters with -Subjects- that meet certain criteria, will be written into our memory as Positive, Negative, or Neutral.

Stereotyping cannot be avoided!!

Stereotyping is part of our brains ability to make predictions in our environment. Another name for this function could be “Intuition” However, the ethical measure has to do with how strongly we react to these emotional predispositions.

Examples of

[Stereotyping], [Intuition] or

[Pattern recognition and memory encoding neurological functions]

  1. Walking into a busy street might get me killed.
  2. People carrying guns have probably shot one of them.

Behavioral Recognition: Non-Verbal:

  1. People who look -angry- are probably angry.
  2. People who look -happy- are probably happy.
  3. People who look -sad- are probably sad.

4.) Emotions: Pros and Cons.

Pro – Helps us to avoid danger and seek resources.

Con – Prevents us from detatching from preconception in order to test new ideas.

5.) Differences in Male and Female Neurology:

– Males have stronger spacial,

Conservative Emotional Predisposition

Conservative vs Liberal
Part 1: Psychological Dualism
Conservative – Emotional Aspect

When it comes to a question of evolution:

Animals, or specifically non-toolmaking animals, are more instinctual than intellectual. While It can be argued that some other animals possess an little measured but possible intellect (Such as whales/Dolphins) they do not likely have predictive or problem solving intelligence. Specifically the kind required to manipulate physical laws to create various tools.

The cortical functions that we understand in higher thought, tend to go to war with our already present emotional state, and so when emotions and coginition interact, defense and coping mechanisms are formed.

→ With the introduction of predictive intelligence, the question of “How does this work” or “Why does it do that” becomes more and more emotionally important, as our perception increases.


In order to fill this emotional need that is virtually impossible to figure out. We created a defense mechanism of a theoretical mind. A being or essence that is in control of what you, the single human is not; and by essence, I mean it can either be [A God] or [An undefined supernatural force]

It is more likely that the need to create an explanation at an emotional level, is a compensation for a lacking of curiosity and the presence of fear.
Where: Fear, was and in some cases still is, an important defense against danger. But when one is predisposed to cognitive psychology, that fear would be more easily reasoned and overridden.

While I cannot prove it [certainly], I do believe I can provide evidence to support the idea of an Psychological duality that is represented by the Conservative vs Liberal Binary.

I am defining and outlining…

“Conservative” As [Emotionally Dominant] in belief systems and decision making.
“Liberal” Which I would define as [Cognitively Dominant]

“We know right from wrong because God write that on our hearts.”

They say something like that. Indicating that God is responsible for our morality, regardless of the atheistic perspective.


— However, If you manage to separate yourself from your reaction against the “sheer stupidity” you might look at it another way.

Check it out…


— If you look at the classical conservative belief systems intrinsic to Christianity and Islam: You could say they contain rules that are first relevant to the [Internal Emotional Makeup/Selfish needs] followed by the secondary concern for the [General social well being]


These religions in particular are heavily centered on emotional reactions.


[Internal/Selfish]: Emotions such as Jealousy, Greed/Want, Sexuality etc…


—> <>Solving them by]:


– [Restrictions on sexuality] = Monogamy (In theory, preventing adultery – Which makes people angry/Jealous)


– [Poverty as virtue] = Theoretically preventing greed and even theft. (People don’t like being stolen from)


– [Accountability] = Simplified with “God” and redemption through a savior figure.

–> Thus creating an internal “Sense of social right/wrong” with this fabricated emotional construct. (Somebody’s always watching)


Now with the notable selfish nature of these religions in mind, consider it in this light.

— In the mind there is [Reactive intelligence*: Emotional] and [Predictive intelligence: Problem solving]


#Reactive Intelligence: Attaching emotion to an idea or situation; in order to best react to it.

Response to wolves at night with [Reaction] of (negative)

Response to Food when hungry with [Reaction] of (Positive)



Most animals have [Reactive Intelligence] in the sense they “Fear” or “want” things.

Typically they know what to be afraid of and in our case, its the unknown.


[Predictive/Problem solving] Relies heavily on the function of the cortex.

A) —> The more active the cortex, the better at planning and problem solving you are.

B) —> The more Emotional the person: The less active these cortical functions.


—> Because of these factors: These religions rely heavily on the more primitive* brain functions of emotion. For that reason, it is designed to protect these internal emotional reactions.

+ But so too does it lack the consideration of the cerebral functions and is prone to “prejudice” and bad judgments against differing ideas/people etc…

(Because emotional reactions are static in nature, and not as easy to change)


#Primitive: Older and from earlier evolution. Not as in “simpler/lesser”

Because of this relationship of rules vs Emotion that is present in the majority of the Static Conservative mentality; This is a pool of people whom I am inclined to statistically define as “Emotionally Dominant” in their psychology.

Meaning they are [more likely] to make decisions [based on emotions], and less apt to solve or learn [complex ideas] = such as science. (Especially where there is theological conflict)
As – Conditioning these cortical functions, would make a person more receptive to new information, and more inquisitive.

Further Speculation (Potential positives)

If there are present neurological factors to account for these emotionally dominant psychological patterns; These people may prove to be more proficient at non-cortical activities.

1. Direct emotional inference or encounter empathy.
+ Meaning, more likely to feel sorry for someone that’s right in front of them.
+ Or to pick up on the emotions of others nearby.
– But not necessarily feel anything for people or animals whom they cannot relate to (Or are not near them)

2. Parenting:
Which is primarily a matter of emotional evolution. As we had children before we could do math.

+ In the sense, they will be more apt to emotionally relate to children, as well as communicate.
+ More likely to remain with spouses for the sake of children. (Because either religious reasons, or the emotional consideration of the children. (Divorce is hell on kids)

3. Better Business owners.
+ More driven to personal success.
– Less concern for “fairness” towards un-relatible individuals.
* Vs Socio-Psychopathic, whom may excel because they cant (emotionally) relate to anyone.


So in conclusion:

The conservative social mentality, as a function of an emotionally predisposed psychological centering, serves in order to react to what would otherwise be an evolutionary reasoning. Basic fears, emotions, needs and wants. Containing a solution to restricting those needs and wants when it is necessary. Causing one predispositions to make judgments on those emotions as opposed to rational contemplation.