Tag Archives: cognitive psychology

PROBLEM CENTRIC NARRATIVE

PROBLEM CENTRIC NARRATIVE

Downward spiral of emotional morbidity.

The Pole Position in Relationship

Image

Women have a strategic advantage in relationship that they tend to exploit unbeknownst to themselves. These instincts, behaviors, and strategies have been hardwired into the human organic computer through millions of years of neural myelination that have been passed on in the form of cellular memory.  Women don’t think about it, they don’t do it consciously, they aren’t aware that they tacitly interpret and judge reality in the experiencing of it.

The female mind was created to be in relationship with children.  The woman thinks that femininity is superior to masculinity, that is why she is female, as such when their is a disagreement between the male and female she refuses to look from his perspective or compromise or negotiate.  She uses her bias and the feminine bias of society and the children to get her way.  She basically hijacks the relationship and holds it for ransom.

If you observe women’s arguing styles you realize that they can’t get over their programming, they act like a mother in the following ways.  They presuppose their moral authority, they try to control the narrative as though they are talking to a child.  They correct the narrative, changing words, they are not just expressing a different sentiment they think that they have the final edit on the conversation.  They talk over you, interrupt your, nag, whine, repeat themselves, refuse to agree, participate, or move towards the solution or compromise, they quote people outside of the relationship whose opinions don’t matter and they will even violate the boundaries of the relationship by bringing people into the argument who are not part of the conversation in order to take their side.  These are not the behaviors of a person who is in relationship or a person who give equal credence to their partner.  The correlation between psychopaths and the narcissistic narrative has recently been discovered and fascinatingly, my theories show that the female brain, especially in relationship with a male brain acts psychopathicly, whereas the male brain is more sociopathic.

Image

The female brain operates from moral authority, operating on superficial aesthetic snap decisions as to what looks right and what sounds right.  The female mind is in relationship with its own authority and as such wants to expand and intensify its authority so it uses illegitimate behaviors and strategies in relationship to create a disparate impact in its own favor.  While men think about creating value for the relationship women think about getting what they want from the relationship and in this way women attack the relationship.  Even in a relationship of two women will try to increase their status, social climbing.  Women don’t debate analytically offering evidence,  and reasons, or being open to experiment, they argue emotionally not being able to conceive of any other solution besides the one that they are leaning towards.  They ask leading questions, they try to control the direction of the conversation, they force an emotional moral frame editing the consideration set of the conversation as if they were the arbitrary judge of the conversation and they try to force you to participate with their premise.

The female mind sees reason as a hostile, alien, influence and refuses to participate with it, or she will conflate moral authority with sapiential authority and herself the high priestess of both, but she is absolutely incapable of not being perfectly predictable in her positions and behavior.

Image

The woman acts as a mediator between father and child, a liaison, a go between, and she can use her position to bring the family unit closer together or to sabotage the father.  She can try to win the child’s favor so that he likes her more by spoiling the child.  If the father competes in this way it is more damaging for the child because he can play the parents off each other and the child starts to think in terms of possessions instead of relationship.  The mother can misrepresent the father to the son and further damage the relationship between them.  Some women go so far as to make the father an object of contempt and ridicule to the children.

Image

For those of you that are familiar with my theories on emergent properties in collective judgments of societies you might remember this piece I did to illustrate how society protects women from men they are in relationship with.  Note further that the man is basically accepted into a society by having children, that is his root in society, his entrance into a society.  Women use every possible strategy to expand and intensify their control, to make it permanent.

Most cultures have an age of adulthood which has historically ended the authority of the mother and begins the authority of the father and the preparation of the child to be a responsible and functional part of society, which also means that the issues that the mother has protected and instilled in the child through invasive narrative or psychological manipulation have to be removed and the child has to be made mentally and emotionally healthy and a contributor to society.  The child is also at this time responsible for the laws of the land and is no longer able to make appeals to feminine authority in the form of mercy and charity claiming to not be responsible for their actions and the consequences thereof.  The problem with America is that none of the social strictures on women apply and at the same time women are unconscious of their instincts and processes and of the evil they do innately.  They don’t have to scrutinize themselves or criticize themselves and they refuse to take responsibility for their actions or the consequences of them.  At the same time the refuse to confine their attentions and judgment to realms in which they are valid and get good results, completely incapable of not tacitly judging and interpreting everything from the position of moral authority.  Refusing to participate with reason they are passive aggressive and perceive themselves at the same time as being passive resisters and reformers of society while all they are really doing is making society weak and vulnerable.

Image

Women are Aggressive Communicators

Image

All of the nastiness and aggression that men are accused of can be found in the communication behavior of women.  I have spent a lot of time studying relationship and patterns in relationship and events in the world and how they are allowed or created by how people relate to one another.  Ever since I was a child I was hypersensitive to sounds and communication styles.  I used to get sick to my stomach listening to live music, and I developed a psychosomatic response to the sound of Diane Chambers, Shelley Long‘s character on cheers.  It wasn’t until I read A. R. Luria‘s book THE MIND OF THE MNEMONIST that I truly started pondering my sensitivity to sound.  I have an almost autistic level of sensitivity to sound, Diane Chamber’s timber made my heart race and I became agitated and my eyes dilated and I wanted to kill something.  I am not like other people, my mind is always working.  I relax into philosophy and higher thought, I am not happy if I don’t have a good conversation or learn something new every day.  This caused me to ponder the difference in communication styles between men and women. http://alfrodull.wordpress.com/2011/02/20/the-most-annoying-character-on-tv/

Image

I recently watched this documentary on Seaworld and noticed something interesting, they said that Tillikum was harassed by the two females he was originally put in the tank with, they would bite him for no reason and leave bloody marks on him.  Tillikum was a larger than average male killer whale.  After studying Deborah Tannen‘s male and female communication rituals and coming up with my theory that male and female brains are actually two different type of intelligences with different approaches to life, value systems, and strategies in relationship I found it interesting how similar Tillikum’s experiences were to my own.  Women will henpeck me and provoke me with no provocation on my part just as they did to him.  I began to ponder if this wasn’t because as a large male he represented a potential threat to them so they started testing him or trying to gain psychological leverage over him.

All of the nastiness and aggression that men are accused of can be found in feminine communication rituals and strategies.  When left alone the female mind acts like a parasite to the male mind.  Women are aggressive in passive ways, they are passively aggressive, covertly hostile.  I have always found it fascinating how over time the woman eventually manages to leverage herself to the point where she takes complete artistic control of the relationship and the man while in it is not allowed to be himself or to be interested in what he is naturally interested in.  Women indulge themselves in female pornography, puppies, kittens, babies, but men are judged as bad for being interested in the type of pornography that creates they pornography she enjoys.

Image

As I become aware of the subtle processes and strategies that women use I realized two things, society in general doesn’t detect them because they are considered normal.  Society has been trained not to scrutinize women or look for them to be the cause of the bad.  Society in general has a feminine bias.  Society will blame other things for the behavior of women.  If somebody says, “man that lady is a bitch, she really did a number on me.”  Somebody will respond, “she must have really gotten screwed over by some man.”  Not only is she rescued from her own behavior, blame for her behavior is put on some imagined male scape goat and she is allowed to go on her crazy way, unscrutinized or blamed, working her evil will on the universe.  The ancients didn’t keep men and women separate to protect women, they did it to protect masculinity from femininity.

Image

Millions of years of gender reinforcement create neural myelination that passes down through cellular memory.  Men are insensitive to their own feelings because life is hard and they have to do unpleasant things so that they and their women and children can live, and women have to be sensitive to their own feelings because they need to feel that feelings are valid in order to be good mothers and take care of horrible little maggot poop factories that wine, because babies communicate no analytical data and only emotional data.  Women and men and children are insensitive to men.  Go figure.

Not just that, you can see that women have adopted communication strategies designed specifically to manipulate the male mind which is sensitive to sound.  They speak in a high pitch, with a rapid cadence.  Persian women have adopted the behavior of speaking in low manly tones to communicate dominance and to turn men off sexually.  All of this works on a subliminal level, women don’t realize they are doing it, and neither do men.

Image

Women ask for mercy from their man, they beg for quarter, they start the relationship by asking him to tell her a lie or perform a herculean labor and then when he fails or fails to protect her from reality of the truth she blames him for a situational problem.  Women use leading questions herding men in certain directions.  “Why don’t you play with the children?”  and then when they start liking him more than her, “How come you spend so much time with the children?  are you some kind of freak?”   Women use humiliation rituals.  “How come you spend so much time with your boyfriends, are you gay?”  She tries to define a real man by what he does for her and what he puts up with from her.  How is it that women are the arbiters of what it means to be “real men” are men the judge of real women?  ‘Cause I have some ideas, just sayin’…

Anatomy of the Female Mind

Image

When I say “the female brain” I am referring to several things: the emergent patterns in the way women as a group behave and make judgments, men that have been indoctrinated into the moral superiority of women, and in a conflict or a relationship the more irrational person or psychopathic person, male or female.

I will give a brief synopsis of my theory on “organic computers”, Neural Myelination is passed on through cellular memory, successful techniques are passed on by people that survived, patterns that were repeated are neural myelinated, this myelination influences the way we perceive reality and make judgments, our judgments were informed by the need to survive of our ancestors, those patterns were created in situations where survival was difficult, those instincts in modern times can be out of touch with reality.

Image

Now, Nature, for lack of a better word compartmentalized functions into male and female functions.  The consideration set of the female mind was edited to be concerned with and for babies, to presuppose an environment created for her in which she could indulge herself in the concern for which her brain was created.  In doing so the female brain makes certain presuppositions and ignores certain factors.  Those concerns which would not be conducive to taking care of a child but would be useful in providing a safe environment for woman and child were the business of the male mind.

Men and women are essentially the same, but compartmentalized by nature to deal with two different concerns and topics in two different ways.  I discovered this when creating my psycholinguistic philosophy.  My philosophy states.

“All narrative is doxography.”

Which seems innocuous at first but it is much deeper than one might expect.  All narrative is point of view, which means that everything said characterizes the person speaking *(assuming you know how I deconstruct narrative).  It wasn’t until I started studying Deborah Tannen‘s research on Male and Female communication patterns that I realized there were two completely different consciousnesses talking to one another.  She refers to this as complimentary schizmogenesis, I think it is more like two alien species that have different values and speak two different languages.

MOTHER

Babies start off as objects, entirely dependent on their mothers, incapable of doing anything for themselves.  They can’t defend themselves, think for themselves, or provide for themselves.  Babies communicate no analytical data and only emotional data, so from the perspective of the female mind emotions have to be valid.  That which has NO value or negative value in the heat of battle is valid to women.  Deborah Tannen refers to the interpretation of the emotional data by these little piss and shit factories as “ventriloquizing”.  Where the woman acts as the pythian oracle to interpret the omens sent to her through the medium of the squirming and whining of the child.

The mother protects the child’s psychosis and aberrations as well as the child.  She doesn’t care if the child is insane, or is capable of dealing with the world at large, that has never been a concern for her, she has a man for that.  She just wants the child to live and be as happy as possible.  This is why historically there was an age or a trial to mark the end of the authority of the mother and the beginning of the training and teaching that would make the child suitable for their transition to the world.

The mother manipulates the child to do things and to think that it was the child’s own idea.  Women use these exact same strategies on men if they can get away with it.  That is just how their brain works.  Women also keep on bringing the attention of the child back to a subject and then communicating emotional data to try to influence the way the child feels about the object.  When women do this to men it is called nagging and whining, or henpecking.  I call it jingling the keys.

SASD

Due to the feminine bias that is innate in the human organism, and due to the nature of superficial, aesthetic, snap decisions coming from the feminine part of the brain.  We judge the flow of negative emotional data as good or bad.  Negative emotional data flows from the child to the mom and from the mom to the dad.  We have a negative reaction to seeing the negative emotional data flowing in the opposite direction.  This patter in collective human judgments creates emergent properties that create disparate impact in favor of unreason, women, and children.  What looks good is not always good for you.

Allow me to illustrate in this way.  The Neural Myelination created over millions of years predisposes us to think that foods that are more densely packed with Macro nutrients are good for us, because that neural myelination was created in an environment in which survival was difficult.  The more packed with positive survival data it is, the better it tastes, to the point where the animal will never eat its natural diet if it has the option.  This makes the horse fat and sickly to the point of death.  Neural Myelination wasn’t created in an environment where survival was easy so our instincts are WRONG!  We as a society redouble our efforts in the wrong direction, compounding the problem because we are not aware of the organism through which we experience life and we are thinking sentimentally instead of analytically and logically.  If you don’t know the logical fallacies and the cognitive biases you can’t keep yourself from making them. 

Horse-Face-Eating-Grain-dreamstime_110698611

*It always annoys me when I tell people that everything said characterizes the person speaking and then they start trying to psychoanalyze me without knowing my method and having NO experience themselves, and never having thought about it until I brought the subject up.  What a bunch of idiots. 

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness

Image

In my philosophy, Rational Praxis-ism, the individual, even in relationship prehends their resources.  That is to say, that your resources do your will because it is a meritocracy and you earned your resources.  Even in relationship your resources do your will unless you have made an agreement to the contrary.  All of the time I hear people arguing for what other people should think and say and do.  In my system your actions, thoughts, and self expression are yours and yours alone.  Only when someone has proven their correctness to you and NOT to themselves and you have agreed to change your behavior can they hold it against you if your behavior is not desirable, or if you changing your behavior is necessary for the success of the endeavor and is reasonable, as in mitigation.  

People are so full of their stupid judgments.  They presuppose their own self appointed moral authority, I refer to this as not being smart enough to detect your own horse shit.  What’s good for you is good for you, and what’s good for me is what’s good for me.  You don’t get to choose what is good for me.  This is known as judging tacitly from analogy.  It is a normative bias in which the person thinking that everybody should think like themselves pecker slaps people with their perspective, arguing that they should change their expression, that they are experiencing life wrong.  It is one thing to say, “this is my experience of life.” or, “you cannot relate to me in this way by doing this with me, I will not participate with it.”   it is quite another thing to say, “you are experiencing life incorrectly and you have to change the way you think, express yourself, and behave.”  especially when their has been no contest of proof, no scientific experiment, and no debate with reasoned arguments. 

The most annoying thing, I think, to me, is that there are soooo many more stupid people than intelligent people, and stupid people are not less judgmental, they are more so…..

Image

EMERGENT PROPERTIES IN HUMAN JUDGMENTS.

Image

Ponder this, how many people have had an enjoyable experience with a bewb?  Now how many people have had an enjoyable experience with a penis?  The vast majority of people are not analytical philosophers, they don’t know the logical fallacies and they don’t know the cognitive biases and as such they can’t stop themselves from making them.  Furthermore I have found that neural myelination accounts for 90% of the decision making of human beings which means cellular memory.  I refer to humans as organic computers because they are predictable.  In their judgments there are certain patterns that emerge, such as a pro female bias.

Contemplate how many more people spend on breast cancer than veterans or prostrate cancer and the fact that Veterans charities are rampant with fraud and theft, which is not tolerated with breast cancer awareness, people are much more hyper vigilant.  But women didn’t sacrifice themselves for us.  Every person that served protected the entire nation from threats.  A woman having breasts is not necessarily a mother or our mother.  Yet we are far more sympathetic to feminine concerns than masculine concerns.

Every year at least $1.5 billion is spent on breast cancer research.  Some of this money comes from an ever-growing number of breast cancer non-profit organizations, but the vast majority comes from government organizations such as the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Department of Defense (DoD).  The funds go largely to preventionand early detection.http://thinkbeforeyoupink.org/?p=1772

girls-playing-doll1

Men women and children have the same bias, choosing in favor of femininity and weakness.  Men are even insensitive to their own desires.  Men don’t even question this when asked to sacrifice themselves for women and children, they just presuppose the validity of it.  Women also don’t question it.  Women have gotten so arrogant and so expectant that men will sacrifice their desires and wishes for women and children that even after not having contributed anything meaningful to a man’s life women finding they don’t have enough of what they want will turn to the man and expect him to sacrifice himself so that she can have more.

image2

The manliest men go off to war, they are in relationship with death and the threats and the ugliness, they create the outside perimeter, the grizzled, gnarly, rind, the crust, the tough outer layer.  That is why I say the male mind is sociopathic.

Inside that are the effeminate men, the champions of normalcy and pleasantness, captain save a ho, the white knights, the arm chair philosophers, with their feminist, elitist, bias.  It is the guy that is not fit to go into battle.  He acts as a moral authority protecting the women from the manly men, but also gaming the system for his own benefit.  He is to cowardly to do what the manly man does.  He is a champion of femininity.

-

The butch women essentially perform the same function as the effeminate men, protecting women from the truth, reality, ugliness, and death.  Lying to women about themselves.  Telling them they are equals to the men and not to worry.  The butch women are closer to the women and children then the effeminate men.  Women have an innate feeling of inferiority to men, Sigmond Freud got that right.  If you observe women in their reasoning, arguing, and behavior, they want to control the penis, they want to own it.  They want to direct the activities of the penis.  They want to send it to attack their enemies.  They want to control how it thinks and they want to be the focal point of its attention and the only source of its happiness.

Penis envy in Freudian psychoanalysis refers to the theorized reaction of a girl during her psychosexual development to the realization that she does not have a penis. Freud considered this realization a defining moment in the development of gender and sexual identity for women[1] — the parallel reaction in boys to the realization that women do not have a penis being castration anxiety. In contemporary culture, the term sometimes refers inexactly or metaphorically to women who are presumed to wish they were men.[2]

law-offices-charity-bar

What is the most fascinating is how the behaviors used to champion negate their own arguments.  The manly women copy the behavior of men, therefore demonstrating that they tacitly believe that masculinity is dominant.  Fritz Perls said that you copy what ever behavior you believe is dominant when you want to win.  So the fact that they use masculine behavior when they want to win demonstrates that they believe masculinity is dominant.  You have to understand the psychosis that the individual must have to use a means different from their argument in order to obtain a sense of victory.  Women do this because it is a natural psychopathic/female strategy to expand and increase feminine authority.  Women think of themselves as a group, WOMEN.  Whereas men do not think of themselves as MEN, they think of themselves as a man.  Men do not feel that their position is increased by being men, while women do, and this comes from the fact that their need recognition was stimulated in that they closetedly feel inferior to men, thus the need for the repeated conquest against men.

The effeminate man will argue that the woman is the equal of man in mental function and ability, but if that is so why does she need the protection of the effeminate man?  The effeminate man argues against reason, and the participation therewith to increase the amount of poontang he has available to himself and not being able to compete with the manly man in manly endeavors, he adopts a strategy flying in the face of reason he presupposes that women need protection from the manly man and that they are incapable of dealing with reality and handling the truth.

The fascinating thing about people’s judgments, when they are no analytical philosophers, is that their judgments always make themselves correct.  It always justifies why they are good for wanting what they want.  Because their are so many weak, stupid, and incorrect people out their all of these strategies and judgments create a disparate impact in favor of weakness, stupidity, and failure.  Why are we attracted to emotional pornography?  Puppies, babies, kittens?  because they are harmless, because we feel like we could protect them and contribute to them, that has positive survival data for us, it means we are surviving well and that we are capable of providing for another.  If we were really secure we wouldn’t judge so hatefully and immediately against things that pose potential threats.   We wouldn’t be controlled by our emotional reactions and pre emptively attack people because they appear strong or smart.

baby-turtle-eats-strawberry-big

http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/organic-computers-definition-by-joxuashiva/ https://thoughtuncommon.wordpress.com/2013/10/22/deuchebag-nation-womans-world-part-2/ http://finscribeofwisdom.blogspot.com/2012/10/unsustainable-emergent-patterns-in.html http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/16/armchair-philosophers/ http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/23/histrionic-co-morbidity-psychopaths-at-work-part-2/ http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/emotional-pornography/