Category Archives: intelligence

Who gets the benefits from the doubts?

self-mutilation(tasteful self mutilation)

If faith is rationalized knowledge you can’t prove, and forgiveness emotional resolution to avoid manipulation, who are you really doubting?

Truth telling is a regular affair. If empathy is the engine, spoken truth is the grease of civilization. Most of the time, the benefit of the doubt is not only implicit, but entirely unvisited. Analysis of every statement, every gesture, every promise would undo civilization. Investment would be exhausting and a terrible trade.

When a flash of insight presents a doubt, the temptation is to ignore it. Civilization is a big machine, and the wise human knows the gears must turn to perpetuate the economy of scale. Down time for repairs will have a non linear cost, but the conscience is first and foremost is a risk engine. The dilemma is usually treated as such, ‘is your conscience groaning more loudly about the risk of a lie, or the risk of addressing it’. This can work but introduces a new risk, gaslighting.

Gaslighting seems silly at first but can be the flat edge to a long wedge. First the lies are subtle and inconsequential to the operation of your society, with one exception, you. You learn to NOT trust your gut and ignore insight.

If a high EQ empath is faced with a single dishonest threat, the dishonest actor eventually becomes silhouetted against their more honest context. Your risk engine retunes itself with it’s flow of higher quality data, and they stand out. The problem is addressed and civilization’s machine chugs on.

There is systemic risk, the risk the conscience is poor at managing a flurry of lies. The intelligent and psychopathic defector WILL notice this golden opportunity. Instead of identifying a narrow pattern of doubt, the conscience is too noisy to be useful. Doubt is aimed inward. ‘I must be the problem.’ Without warnings of risk the conscience becomes a liability.

If you are untrained in proposing and rationalizing conspiracies, you can be taught to throw away your conscience or even program it against your own interests. Not just you. Everyone. Flooding people with enough lies to disable their conscience requires a conspiracy. Those that discourage conspiracy theory are likely in the institutional gaslighting business, better known as propaganda.

Who benefits from the doubts? The institutions people are directly involved in. The hierarchies that are riskiest to fork or otherwise defect from. Today that is their governments, their schools, their employers. Those wise to history know finding a criminal conspiracy can be as simple as asking who benefits? Cui Bono.

Doubts are yours, and no good comes from throwing them away. Rationalize them. Not because the conscience is never wrong, but if you don’t use your risk manager, you lose it. Researching, fact checking, and setting traps for the unscrupulous benefits you. Detect reality. Accept no lies, not even the small ones. Painful honesty keeps your conscience active, well tuned, and in a position to defend the economies of scale that afford us the luxury of leisure, and it’s prosperous civilization.

Your empathy, and it’s outrage, IS the machine. The top priority must be keeping the context honest. Demand people with high EQs. Always observant, tough as nails, and a zest for learning. Test their empathy. Protect the machine with vigorous curation. Reject the benefit of the doubt. Doubt people. Doubt systems. Doubt away.

Faith: genius vs talent


Talent hits a target no one else can hit. Genius hits a target no one else can see.” — Arthur Schopenhauer

A society that can’t allow faith disallows genius. Talent may be the most visible worker, but genius is the scaffolding of progress. A social mode that allows genius also allows external saviours. They are the same archetype and have the same elements.

This can be measured by a societies ability to separate accommodation from validation. If you must categorize and measure ideas to allow them, you disallow those that produce ideas from the edge of periphery. In simple terms you suffer when you can’t accommodate people who are smarter than you. I’m not saying a civilizations success is measured by seeking external saviours, that’s a setup for cult, but don’t count them out either.

Usually societies discard genius when they misunderstand faith. Faith is an insight that can’t be proven or dis-proven. It’s a game of likelihoods and successful predictions. The genius may not be able to convey their whole ideas in their lifetime, but they can apply their right ideas to the practical world of the now. This is done to build credibility, a simpler language more people and sometimes many people can understand.

Credibility of prediction is pragmatism. Pragmatism is systemically successful because it recognizes exceptional performance of prediction. While it may seem to cherry pick from disciplines, it is actually recognizing genius. Refusing to make social systems more simple than possible to protect the egos of their lower intelligence observers.

The process of the less intelligent synchronizing with genius requires acceptance based on performance. Inevitably this manifests as faith. Subconsciously acknowledging the significance of predictive performance without understanding all the details at once. Faith is not some blind allegiance, but a pathway for the conscience to drive the expensive investment of rationalization. The more understandable details of a difficult to grasp idea can be carefully vetted, the more opportunity the subconscious has to model the idea to apply it in total.

Protect high quality ideas and their vessels, insist your society be both sceptical and coherent with humility. It’s no accident genius is marked by prediction, the metamind’s (the conscience’s) speciality. Rewarding only talent is psychopathic and rejects humanities most exceptional behaviours. Behaviours that form civilization itself.

Science behind civgene: The puzzle box


Responding to some rather silly accusations that I just made civgene up.   This was always intended as a destination in hard science, at the least.   First the septic may want to look at the paper on falsification.   And then go on to answer why civgene is not just ‘the pack gene’ plus intelligence.

Now for a behavior feather in the cap of civgene. Imagination vs visualization.  You many want to see some earlier psychopath/animal vs empath comparisons here.

Humans know humans can be trusted.  Humans know visible appearance (the primary sense) can differ from attributes. The foundation of imagination.


Direct to movie.

Autoplay is off on the movie below. Usually you click or tap and try space bar. It’s a little over 3 minutes long.

The key here is the failure of the primates to recognize either that a human pointing was an attempt to assist or that the identically sized boxes are actually different weights.

Now for one of the original foundations of civgene.  The puzzle box experiment.  Please fast forward to 41:30.  I have not preset the video to that for you because the whole thing is worth watching, but the last 20 minutes are key. If it’s taken down it’s a Nova called ‘Ape Genius’ if it’s ever taken down.

There are three testable differences that separate humans from apes.
1. Apes have vastly superior visual memories.
2. Humans quickly reconcile that an object may not be as it visually appears.
3. Apes won’t suspend their own observations when taught by demonstration.

Evolution favors imagination over imitation.

The burden of faith


Civgene is the theory that humans with a metamind (more or less the conscience) evolved from psychopaths.  That animals the world over lack the properties of metamind (at least friendship, property, freedom, currency, and investment) and need not just intelligence, but also trust to accomplish civilization.  That civilization and it’s wonders (money, markets, specialization, economy of scale, and multi-tiered technology) is the logic of compassion.

This, like all evolution, stems from a genetic accident with an advantage.  The ability to assess risk in a split second.  A precognitive sense of long term consequences.   The metamind,  the source of civilizing levels of trust is a risk engine.  How does it work?  How does it signal to us that it’s risk calculation is complete?  Through sudden subconsciously driven emotion.  Therein lies the burden.

The process of rational determination of the origin and meaning of sudden out of context emotion, or rationalizing, is difficult.  It benefits from intimate knowledge of the subconscious self, and needs tireless practice.  The key to operation of a metamind is faith.  Faith is knowing something you can’t prove.  A perfect match for a human in the position of receiving  an emotional warning they can’t immediately rationally quantify.  Faith is how people practice defending the urge to act in a conscionable but unexplainable way.

Is it any wonder that people flock to faiths of all shapes and sizes?  How else would they practice using their own minds risk engine.  It’s good for them too.  Arguing a conclusion you trust by testing logic until something fits is the direct consequence of civgene mutation.  So is cooperation in groups larger than the largest troop of monkeys.  Society is the de facto faith based organization of civilization.

It is natural that people with a common faith would organize in tighter groups.  The benefits of community rationalization are simply too great to ignore.  Hashing out the correct (or sometimes wrong) rational response to emotional signals that are triggered by the risks they face.  Successful accurate rationalization repels critics with incorrect rationalization, flawed risk assessment, and self interested opportunists at risk of exposure of defections from societies at all scales.  Religion and politics are groups of empathic humans exploring their faith.  Groups working together at tuning their waking minds to understand the signals from their guts (so to speak.)

Society and therefore civilization become undermined and eventually destroyed when religion or politics are subverted.  People invest in a flawed model of group rationalization and at best errors occur.  At worst peoples very metamind can be rewritten by the group they sought out to help understand it.  People who are interested in manipulating others for their own benefit, can create rewards for failed assessments.  The metamind is retrained to respond to ghost risks, and the conscience becomes controlled externally.   Marketing, propaganda, dogma, and gaslighting among others fill this role.

How can this happen?  Shouldn’t the metamind detect the threat to itself?  Over time, thousands of bad inputs and decisions slowly reshape it to reflect a programmed risk without a basis in the individuals personal experience.   The metamind likely does warn that it’s accuracy is declining, but it’s a system of subtle signals that can be drowned out by acute fear.  Fear that can be activated reliably by a few specific signals.

  • You can’t leave our faith without serious consequences.
  • You can’t criticize our faith without serious consequences.
  • You must join our faith or there will be serious consequences.

The consequences can be real or imagined, but the fear blocking internal warnings is real.  These signals are repeated over and over again by those who would replace civilization with a pack behavior (territory, treaty, alliance, assignment, and favour.)  They are a message of fear designed specifically to deter the forking of religions and political groups as conscionable people are reprogrammed into proto-psychopaths.  This is why forking any hierarchy must be a protected human right, not just in rhetoric, but in practice.  These signals differentiate between a faith based religion or political party and a cult or political ideology.

Protect your conscience, protect all faith.  Discern cult from religion.  Discern political ideology from politics.  Reject conceptual fanaticism.  Promote and protect forking even if you don’t understand every instance, and societal progress will be made.

Edit:  more apt image…

Trust markets to a fault? Ask an ad man for the facts about behavior.


Great Interview with Rory Sutherland.  Turns out he, armed with some ideas from Richard H. Thaler has rather scathing (and pleasantly veiled) criticism of modern economics.   I have some reading to do, but it sure seems the Thaler’s ‘econs’ are EXACTLY like civgene’s economic view of psychopaths.  Logic or rational thought being the only thing making decisions for people in an economy is an absurd idea.

Marketing if you didn’t know finds it’s start with people like Edward Barnays,  Sigmand Freud’s nephew.  It, like a dead man’s switch, is a morally neutral tool.   Ranging from useful public service announcements, to nazi propaganda.   Rory certainly seems to want to do some good in the world, sharing his secrets.   Not only does this help us understand his trade, but ourselves.

Some quotes follow if you prefer to read.   Enjoy.

“One of the fantastic things, I always say, is that the digital world is like Galapagos Islands for the understanding of evolutionary psychology.  The little foibles of human behavior that crop up online.   Are very very telling in what the what deeper human mind really cares about.   What it finds attractive, more important what it finds repellent.  The system one brain (Earlier quote “primarily the subconscious”) is more about the avoidance of catastrophe than the attainment of perfection.”
“System one resides in the darker part of the brain.  System two(the logical conscious brain) is post rationalizing decisions taken by system one.”
“When we design experiences, or when we design choices , or when we design websites, it makes perfectly good sense to design them to work with our evolved psychology.  What we somtimes do is design products for what Richard Thaler calls ‘econs.’  Which is a completely imaginary species which has never existed.  That probably wouldn’t would have survived had it sprung up by chance which is that completely rational man beloved of economic models.  Which would be comepltely hopeless in any real world situation.”


Defense against a psychopath: The dead man’s switch



While psychopaths and other animals share behavioral traits, the smartest psychopaths can be nearly as intelligent as the smartest emapths.  Here is the danger in thinking that psychopaths are illogical, hateful or cruel for fun.  Every human is different, but for the most part they are using the tools they have, the best they can.  They don’t want to lose the competitions they create, they just aren’t as good at deciphering complex or distant outcomes as empaths are.  With too many variables, every choice looks like a roll of the dice to them.  Logic breaks down with scale.

Fortunately there is a way to express natural long term risk to them in an immediate way.  The dead man’s switch.  Simply model the predictable negative outcome, and create a switch that with the absence of your attention will create the appropriate response.  You have created a contest and won it before they even knew it existed.  Now they are allied to you in preventing the negative outcome for them which is a foregone conclusion should you become incapacitated.  Don’t feel guilty about this.  They have no real concept of how friendship works, and are most comfortable operating as transitory allies.  Something that is now possible with less fear of seemingly random aggression.

Here are some examples of dead mans switches for illustration.

An informational dead man’s switch.

A physical dead man’s switch.

A warning.  Unlike shunning, reserving judgement, or forgiveness this tool isn’t inherently moral.  It can be used in very immoral ways.  It is up to you to determine a technically accurate switch, resulting action, and impact should the switch be triggered.  As a rule using general moral principles (murder is wrong, envy is usually self destructive, etc…) should minimize collateral damage and create a positive outcome for moral agents left behind.  As a good test, should you be incorrect about their intentions or psychopathy, there should minimal negative consequences for them when the switch is triggered.  Ideally in the case of a incorrectly aimed switch, any damage should be reversible.

The key to successful use is to implement multiple switches.  Do not indicate exactly how many switches there are.  That way there is no sudden jeopardy should a switch be discovered, and the existence of some switches can be announced if needed.  Informational switches are the best like simply indicating a negative on a web page and that the web page may be removed some day (implying the positive)  Remember Narcissists and ASPD stage psychopaths already face a formidable enemy in the legal system (paying taxes in a city with a capable homicide detective is a dead mans switch) so the real problem is sociopaths.

Sociopaths are psychopaths who dedicate themselves to not getting caught (acting like a psychopath) so this indicates a remedy.  Presenting clear evidence of their sociopathy or makes an excellent dead mans switch.  Also such a switch could create new evidence, for instance, jealousy in your aggressing sociopath demonstrating their nature in public.  A well designed situational switch is superior to a static informational one as the fresher the data, the less likely the sociopath has concocted a script, or accumulated the favour, territory, or allies to counter it.

Humans, violence, and faith



We are all psychopaths underneath our conscience. Since even low EQ/IQ empaths ace the psychopath variations of wants/abilities/limits with the aid of the metamind, and one third of that is (psychopath ‘abilities’ aka ASPD) we will always be capible of violence.

All animals are violent. It’s not personal. It’s survival. Compared to us they are all psychopaths. We project our love, compassion and empathy all around us. People, animals, plants, inanimate objects. Especially if it has a large head to body ratio and big eyes. A non psychopath human (an empath) can flatten any other selfless act in the animal kingdom to a rounding error in pure scale.

When our conscience/metamind determines that someone/something else doesn’t have a conscience, it sets our inner psychopath loose. Violence becomes many times more likely.

Note that a metapsychopath may have no negative reaction to a moment of external ‘no conscience’ realization. It’s because they have been conditioning their psychopathic self to act on behalf of the conscience, but without it’s typical continuous input. No loss of control occurs as the state of logical selfishness is reached, because it has been reconciled with and serves the temporally dormant metamind. The conscience simply steps back the and empath deals with the situation in strictly rational terms.

The metamind can even be the driving force behind violence. For instance violence in the name of a faith. A conscience can normalize the idea that a particular faith is the only valid demonstration of a person having a conscience. Then it lets the inner psychopath loose and screams, strikes, rapes and kills like a Viking raiding party.

That example is why it’s so important to separate faith from cult. Cult thinks it is the only true path, demonstrated by thinking it is above reproach. If you deviate from it, criticize it, or try to leave it, the conscience of it’s members shut off, and it’s members become temporary psychopaths in the face of a heretic. Sooner or later, violence results.

Why does this not occur with the metapsychopath? Because they are in control of the change. Their rational and metamind are resolved. Usually way in advance through inner work as rationalization and emotional self learning.

The cult is not just a faith but an organization. And organization that programs it’s members into protopsychopaths. The protopsychopath has no control over the change. They see, react, and act.

Faith is critical to the conscience, but it can never be allowed to monopolize it. The worst ASPD psychopath can’t hold a candle to the destructive power of a faithful fanatic with a conscience. For individual action, ruthless self sacrifice is unmatched in our world. The check to prevent faith from leading to protopsychopathy is the recognition that we can only grow emotionally through doubt and mistakes. That knowlage is critical to being in control of ones own conscience.

That’s the difference between a religion and a cult. Both are organizations of faith, but only one disables the individuals ability to control their own conscience.

Reason vs Logic


It is said a person can lose the forest for the trees.  It seems to me this is a lesson about logic.  Logic and it’s mechanizations can describe the smallest components, but run into real trouble when they encounter scale and complexity.  Even with the full scope of computation power at our disposal, total atomic simulation without assumption is strikingly small.  At a quantum scale, where the Heisenberg effect is clearly demonstrated, hindsight obviously demonstrates how easily a subtle innocuous detail can change a complex equation.  Rigorous science and it’s complete logic can crumble with a subtle change.

This thought experiment begs the question what is intelligence itself?  If people can typically remember seven or so visual ques before their memory errs, and a computer billions or trillions, clearly memory can not scale with logic in our minds for perfect conclusions.  Our minds are not built to calculate en total on the fly, our thinking is rife with memory shortcuts, be them facts, assumptions or probabilities.  Therein lies the secret to intelligence.

We can’t take assumption seriously as the source of intelligence.  An assumption is defined as guess in any tense.  I could argue an assumption is sometimes a rationalization, but that may be worse.  At least sometimes.  As above facts are superior to assumptions, but require intense computation and perfect data and perfect memory to be useful.  Heisenberg tossed that out with his piercing stare.

So were left with probability or likelihoods.  Dismissed as luck, probability is pervasive as math but labeled as belief when not exposed to the rigors of logic.  But belief, an assertive wish, is not even close to it’s false synonym faith.  Who are these people with faith?   People who know something they can’t explicitly prove.  It need not be ego projection or an assertive attack on the outside world.  While faith is wrongly attacked it’s true synonym the hunch, is heralded as the foundation of not only police work, but all insight.  Faith is just another hunch.

If your only method of producing probabilities is logic, then it can only be as good as the tool that proceeds it.  This is the true eureka of the civilization gene.  The eureka itself.  Civilization started not when humans began to recall vast tomes of facts (twenty plus visual ques in some monkeys), but when they could discern probabilities as quickly as the color blue.  The metamind, using broad emotional memories to compare unlike things, not only could quickly produce good enough data about immediate risks, but could predict problems without any conscious logic needed.  Human EQ took a sudden leap forward, pulling IQ along with it.  A psychopath only has one mind, a logical one.  The empath has two, a logical one for the trees, and a metamind for the forest.  A reasonable person uses them both.