Monthly Archives: February 2017

RAD confirms civgene amnesia prototyping


RAD or Reactive Attachment Disorder fits the civgene Amnesia Prototyping model perfectly.

“defined as a condition where an individual has difficulty forming lasting relationships and lacks the ability to be genuinely affectionate toward others.  In addition, persons with RAD do not learn to trust others and do not appear to develop a conscience.”

What creates the conditions for RAD?

“This is believed to be caused by abuse or separation (physical or emotional) from one’s primary caregiver during the first three years of life”

The metamind model explains what is happening.  The non-psychopath’s brain is in a different mode at this age.  Instead of forming memories the metamind is forming types of memories or prototypes.  If a child is forced into risk assessment for survival (severe abuse) or has no emotional input whatsoever (Daniel Solomon ignored in an orphanage), prototypes are never created, and the metamind (the conscience/subconscious) can’t compare unlike things.  The metamind is a risk engine fed by emotional metadata.  With no data to output, no risk is modeled, and no conscience is displayed.

Of course the solution has already been found.  Attachment therapy.  What’s new is Civgene’s contribution to why it works.  A sufficient number of prototypes need to be formed so emotional structures can be attached to all memories, realizing the full biological EQ (and ultimately IQ) and forming a complete metamind.  The therapy works because such an extreme trust is formed (in the absence of risk) that during the therapy.  Hopefully in stretches of time that are long as possible. The key is no real consequences for the subjects actions, hence the conscience sends no risk signals.  In that environment the metamind may change modes to prototyping.  In that case it can write new emotional memories as prototypes doing the work that couldn’t occur at a young age.  Writing the prototypes that would have naturally formed in between 2 and 8 years old.

The bad news here is, there has been much false hope for curing actual psychopaths.  RAD victims may act like young psychopaths, but are not, nor ever will be psychopaths.  They are reverting to the pre-civilization gene jealousy conscience (acting like a psychopath.)  They have a metamind, but it never fully formed do to a lack of nurturing programming from guardians.

RAD untreated is a preventable, predictable, possibly lifelong, perpetuation of the first state of the metamind for humans born with one.  The states are undeveloped(including RAD), suppressed(transitory), metapsychopathy, and protopsychopathy.


The cult test


In a previous civgene, I presented a series of axioms that led to the cult test.   Most societies operate at least partly on faith.  Stating assumed truths that individuals can not plausibly test with vigor.  The cult test presents three conditions that if a fundamentalist religious or political faith infringes on outsiders freedom, it has slipped into cult.

The cult test is as follows. If any condition is met, it’s a cult.
1. Denial of exit.
2. Aggression toward outsider speech.
3. Refusal to commit to peace with outsiders.

Freedom is a core human behavior (differs from animals) because it’s how humans allow each other space to make the most of their emotional metadata, usually forming faiths.  A faith being knowing something you can’t prove.  An emotional output from the metamind (the conscience/subconscious), a passively driven risk engine connecting unlike things based on emotional similarity.  A probability engine.  Effectively rationalizing a faith can take a second or longer than lifetime.  Hence the utility for an indeterminate time to make your own decisions, better known as freedom.

Faith alone is not the goal but the means to achieve the goal of all life, autonomy.  Cult occurs when faith becomes an end not the means. Everyone’s set of faiths must inherently be different (aside from biological differences) because the metadata connected to their memories and their experiences are different.  As experiences deviate so will faiths.  Denying this process for an individual is detrimental to the common benefit of human society.

Some faiths will occur in common so expression and organization of common ideas is beneficial.  Rationalization can be rigorous so invention, specialization, and currency operate like in other economies.  But also like other economies stagnation can occur if psychopathic or animal kingdom work-a-likes are substituted for effective intelligence, and progress stagnates.  Damaging and even completely crushing autonomy.

All three conditions of the cult test are designed to protect the natural functionality of the empathic mind without interfering in opportunities of economies of scale (rapid rationalization.)  Just like all logical constructs, logical constructs about natural forming but yet unproven probabilities can have advantages for all people.  The conditions of the cult test together form to protect the fundamental human right, the right to fork.  The right of human beings to pursue their biological advantage of rapid risk assessment without human created hierarchical blockage.  Faith is what gives human beings their complete intelligence, and also is what is cited by those who try to dismember that intelligence for personal gain though hierarchy.

The key to retaining our freedom is the ability to distance yourself from destructive hierarchies while embracing constructive ones.  The cult test ensures that right by disallowing the combination of pure faith as a potentially manipulated or even completely fabricated external process, from the ability to enforce your adherence to an external faith structure.  The cult test protects the rapid rationalizer seeking community from slavery, by separating physical and mental force from faith and it’s beneficial ideas.

I present these additional axioms to permanently disconnect the relationship of force and faith.

  • Faith is subconscious realization (emotional metadata).
  • Reason is rational thought combined with faith.
  • Faith can occur without reason.
  • Force is only moral in the face of clear and present danger.
  • Determining clear danger can include faith.
  • Determining present danger must include literal observation and therefore rational thought.
  • Clear and present danger can be determined either by reason or rational thought alone.
  • Force justified by faith alone is a farce.


Terminology error – misuse of ‘recessive’


An error has become apparent throughout the civgene site and papers.  I have been incorrectly using the term recessive.  This stems from my high school level biological science background.  The mistake specifically was thinking that there were only two basic building blocks of genetic combinatorics.  A gross miscalculation.

In my defense I had no idea I would ever envision or peruse anything like civgene.  My rudimentary Mendelian generic understanding caused me to infer that any gene that was not dominant must be recessive. I was at the least, dated.  In fact had I been aware of the many types(and still growing) of genetic inheritance I would never have said it.  It is possible psychopathy is a combination of several genes and/or could be autosomal recessive, Autosomal dominant, (probably not X or Y linked) or a number of not commonly named patterns.  I just don’t know, but will pursue this knowledge.

My error was in not saying what I really meant, ‘Not Mendelian dominant.’ or ‘Not dominant’  This assertion is based on solid external science.  Psychopaths are officially considered to not be not curable.  This was the original tell for me that it is likely genetic.  Cases are distributed evenly between males and females.  Further, symptoms seem to begin from a very young age, one or two years old as childhood amnesia ends sooner, making postnatal epigenetics less likely.  Psychopaths can appear in families with no apparent history, but there does seem to be a higher likelihood of psychopaths being born to one or more psychopath parents.

I caught this error after some vague advice about misusing ‘recessive’ prompted me to look into the combinatorics of a civgene. I could not line up some estimates of psychopath growth with the numeracy of recessive genes.  During this process I learned that combinatorics vary wildly along with inheritance patterns.  Many alleles be part of a single gene or that genes with a single function can include large swaths of DNA.  Using combinatorics to prove genetic inheritance types without first knowing the genes involved can be difficult or impossible.  Lesson learned.

If you are a geneticist, you probably already realize this error does not effect the viability of civgene.  My thinking was correct even if my label was incorrect.  I apologise for any part in delaying recognition or visibility of civgene with this error.

The question remains of remediation.  Since the meaning was consistent, I can simply replace the word.  I have found 1 papers and 5 blog posts with the error.  I will correct ‘recessive’ with ‘not dominant’ ASAP and post the corrected links here as I find them.

Please if you find this to be further in error, please contact me with corrections ASAP.  Also if you find recessive in use, please contact me.  Thanks for you assistance.