How to know if a theory is nonsense

Reality is like a metaphorical tree of knowledge, with all branches connecting eventually to mathematics. For example;

Modern dysgenics is based on female psychology + political incentives.

Female Psychology:

6. Female psychology is based in evolutionary psychology
5. Evolutionary psychology is based on the mathematics of gene selection
4. Gene math is based on biochemistry
3. Biochemistry is based on the laws of general chemistry
2. General chemistry is based on atomic physics
1. Atomic physics is based on quantum physics.
0. There is nothing below quantum physics, (that we have proof of).

Political Incentives:

3. Political incentives are based on the game theory dynamics of democracy.
2. Game theory is based on the prisoner's dilemma.
1. The prisoner's dilemma is based on pure mathematics + maximizing gain under evo psych assumptions.

Thus, modern dysgenics has its root in mathematics of political incentives + quantum physics of evolutionary psychology.

The tree on knowledge has three trunks.

• Quantum physics
• Astronomy
• Pure Mathematics

All of these are "math subjects" — that is — all is reducible to math. Math is the zeroth trunk of the tree.

Now here is an example of a bullshit theory.

1. Male dominance is based in patriarchy.
2. Patriarchy is based on systems of oppression.
3. Systems of oppression are based on white supremacy.
4. White supremacy is based on historical injustices.
5. Historical injustices are based in patriarchy.

Wait a minute! Your chain of causality goes in a loop!

Or it might not be a loop. It might just be a web of ideas that all refer to each other, like this;

Not all bad philosophies commit the fallacy of circular reasoning. Some commit the fallacy of self-referential reasoning, where the pattern of logic is much more complex than simply going in a circle, but goes in a self-referential pattern nonetheless. Circular reasoning is simple, e.g.,

The Bible proves the existence of God.
How do you know?
Because God inspired the writing of the Bible.

Self-referential reasoning is vastly more complex. A random possible example is given below.

A is proven by B
B is proven by C
C is proven by D
D is proven by B

AND

C is proven by B
B is proven by D
D is proven by A
A is proven by C

AND

C is proven by A
A is proven by D
D is proven by B
B is proven by C

And yet, no matter how complex it is, or how many twists and turns it makes, it never connects to one of the branches of mathematics. It never refers to anything outside of itself. If feminism were cogent it would go something like this,

1. Male dominance is based on the fact that equal societies fail, and are out-competed by male dominated ones.
2. Equal societies fail because women sabotage them.
3. Women sabotage because of hypergamy.
4. Hypergamy exists because it is a holdover from tribal mating behaviors, (rape).
5. Primate rape is the outcome of the mathematics of coercive mating strategies.
6. Coercive mating strategies have their origin in the mathematics of gene flow.
7. Gene flow maps to biochemistry
8. Biochemistry has its origin in general chemistry
9. General chemistry has its origin in physics.
10. Physics has its origin in quantum physics.

All cogent theories connect with a scientific subject below them. Economics, anthropology, mimetics, and political science are all based on evolutionary psychology. Evo psych is based on biochemistry, which is based on chemistry, etc.

As already stated, there are three trunks; quantum physics, astronomy, and pure mathematics.

Quantum physics has molecular physics and Newtonian physics as its branches, and maybe other branches also.

All living systems are a subset of chemistry and molecular physics.

All humanities subjects should trace their origin to the math of living systems, that is, to chemistry or molecular physics.

Your theater arts degree is bullshit because it cannot trace performance to evolutionary psychology, which traces itself to biochemistry, etc., etc.

Science is a hierarchy while the "humanities" are a cluster fuck of disconnected subjects.

Reality is recursive.

• A principle builds a system.
• The same principle builds the brain that interprets that system.
• The same principle builds the moral reasoning of the brain that is outraged by the implications of the principle.
• The brains built by that system, build political systems based on their own psychology, and then fail to grapple with the principles that built them.
• The brains commit genocide when they finally begin to (mis)understand the principle.
• The brains develop a taboo against understanding the principle.
• The brains built by a principle then have to unlearn their own taboo to avoid the next catastrophe.

Our tribal past has given us a capacity for make-believe. Make-believe gives your tribe cohesiveness in the face of existential threats. You have 2 parents, 4 grand parents, 8 grand parents, etc. As a result everyone in your tribe is a distant genetic relative. If you die for your tribe, but your tribe survives, your genes are still passed on in the other members. Individual death is thus preferable to the annihilation of your whole society, since there are more total copies of your genes in a few thousand relatives than just your own body.

Make-believe creates the Schelling point around which tribal unity occurs. It does not matter what you believe as long as it gives you unity. Make-believe, (religion) is more useful to genetic survival than reality itself.

Because the tribe is more useful than the individual, humans have,

Communist tendencies
Conformity
Religion in adults, (make-believe in children)
Ritual
Folk activism
Xenophobia
High School Cliques
Egalitarianism
Heroism
Self-sacrifice
A sense of morality
Schelling points
Virtue Signaling
Story Telling/Entertainment
Exchange
Trade
Punishment
Reciprocity
Desire for respect
Shaming the unusual

All of these traits persist in the modern era. Most college level subjects can be expected to be proxies for religion (Women's Studies, African Studies, Chicano Studies, etc.) , story telling, (History, Anthropology), exchange, (economics), trade, (accounting, quants), and other subjects. Most subjects relate to tribal nature more than the scientific tree of knowledge.

Because make-believe has more use than reality, humans act like morality is more true than reality. A famous example of this is Marx's labor theory of value, LTV, which pretends that what ought to be, actually is.

This is the most important lesson here, and the lesson is this; humans compulsively insert morality into reality, conflating the two with each other. Science is corrupted because the tribal always makes its way into the scientific. Scientific debates are heated because of folk activism. Genetics is taboo because of xenophobia. The humanities are left-wing because of communist tendencies. Theories that threaten the status quo receive punishment.

People actually have the nerve to say, "we can't study that because of moral consequences," as if science was the problem instead of tribal legacy genes. Morality itself is tribal.

So how do you know that a theory is nonsense? Because it goes in a loop, or forms a self-referential pattern, or has its origin in human nature itself, or because it presents moral assertions as factual ones, or a combination of these behaviors. And if it does not connect up to the tree of knowledge that is a dead give away that it is nonsense.

P.S. Self-referential reasoning is also the cognitive pattern of a schizophrenic.