Well, you pretty much blackpill men here. That they are ever truthful, and whether there are transcendental norms toward which they can strive (and according to which they fail)-these ideas do not enter in. Pretty nihilistic, in other words. Possibly it all comes down to your dismissal of teleology as, for instance, Aristotle and Aquinas detail it. Do that, and every man is absurd.
You’ve identified the game but not the way it’s played right.
In execution, this all tracks with the behavior of some mouthy dipshit who registers as permanently lower caste to everyone. It’s crude and stupid and really just comes down to reputation management on the shallowest level, especially when they lie about their past. It’s just stupid.
The option for those men is to not talk shit, which many men actually do, you just don’t notice them and neither do women. They are ghosts.
But there is such a thing as an effective man, and they also say things which (maybe more tastefully) inform others of their virtues and imply that they know what’s going to happen and are somewhat in control of it. But those brags aren’t reputational tools in themselves.
They’re promises. They *will* be greater than the moment when it comes. They are wagering on themselves, and any man who doesn’t, you’re allowed to pity and you might as well exile him to hell or San Francisco.
Disagree, and you’re talking like a confidence man. Even for occupations where the main ingredient is psychology, you need more than to get other people caught up in your field.
Psych jobs are mostly leadership and sales, and they rely on knowledge to build trust. You can’t separate knowledge from emotional tenor.
I don’t think focusing on truth is maladaptive, although there’s a certain “technically/ rules lawyer” aspect to some men that can be called a fixation. And they are often front-loaded on faggotry.
But operational ability depends on knowing truth, not some Websters trivia bullshit but full-context knowledge. If you keep to the useful type, it can’t be overvalued.
Operational ability depend on action, delusion is no problem as action makes it all work. Action depends on faith, positive affirmations get you further than critical thinking. People like to claim IQ predicts sucess put this is really a myth, by large for example politicians have completely average IQs, but there’s no absence of high end IQs in the insane asylum and rehab.
See that's the difference between an engine and the mind: a person act on what they feel they deserve, similarily society operate that way as well, knowledge can not deduce that as faith is the ingredient. Occupations where all you need is knowledge, like mechanics, are the least valued, in all the rest charisma and feelings are more important.
"A man’s worldview tracks the hierarchy in which he can matter, the coalition willing to dignify him, the enemies he wants license to hate, and the women before whom he needs to seem impressive. Beyond that his “values” are mostly all performative LARPing" while I won't deny there are many men like this, and almost all have this going on to some degree as we are fallible humans and not perfect beings, but the idea that no man has principles beyond self-interest which you seem to infer is complete and utter nonsense, that one would have to assume must be a projection of your very own character onto others.
I don't disagree with any of this, but it's really hard to find meaning in life when the rules and norms that you've exposed, turn out to be so cynical, self-interested and transactional. But I guess this essay isn't for me. Or if I'm being honest, I'm a man who has no power. So my opinion will never matter.
I focus on ethical, moral, legal, and political deception. But I love how you've teased out the way we lie to ourselves, and others, about ourselves. While I bucket this under status signaling, the detail and clarity you've produced here is gold. Well done. -CD
Wtf, so many words and complex barely readable sentence structure. I was THIS 🤏 close to "I'm not reading allat".
"An idiot admires complexity, a genius admires simplicity, a physicist tries to make it simple, for an idiot anything the more complicated it is the more he will admire it, if you make something so clusterfucked he can't understand it he's gonna think you're a god cause you made it so complicated nobody can understand it. That's how they write journals in Academics, they try to make it so complicated people think you're a genius", - Terry Davis
The only thing I'd add is that some degree of it's adaptive--I was vaguely aware of these, tried to avoid doing them, and as a result when once asked to list my strengths couldn't come up with any.
This was a systematic and surgical dissection of the male id, and I personally felt it. I will be ruminating on this one for the next month probably.
Well, you pretty much blackpill men here. That they are ever truthful, and whether there are transcendental norms toward which they can strive (and according to which they fail)-these ideas do not enter in. Pretty nihilistic, in other words. Possibly it all comes down to your dismissal of teleology as, for instance, Aristotle and Aquinas detail it. Do that, and every man is absurd.
You’ve identified the game but not the way it’s played right.
In execution, this all tracks with the behavior of some mouthy dipshit who registers as permanently lower caste to everyone. It’s crude and stupid and really just comes down to reputation management on the shallowest level, especially when they lie about their past. It’s just stupid.
The option for those men is to not talk shit, which many men actually do, you just don’t notice them and neither do women. They are ghosts.
But there is such a thing as an effective man, and they also say things which (maybe more tastefully) inform others of their virtues and imply that they know what’s going to happen and are somewhat in control of it. But those brags aren’t reputational tools in themselves.
They’re promises. They *will* be greater than the moment when it comes. They are wagering on themselves, and any man who doesn’t, you’re allowed to pity and you might as well exile him to hell or San Francisco.
Disagree, and you’re talking like a confidence man. Even for occupations where the main ingredient is psychology, you need more than to get other people caught up in your field.
Psych jobs are mostly leadership and sales, and they rely on knowledge to build trust. You can’t separate knowledge from emotional tenor.
I don’t think focusing on truth is maladaptive, although there’s a certain “technically/ rules lawyer” aspect to some men that can be called a fixation. And they are often front-loaded on faggotry.
But operational ability depends on knowing truth, not some Websters trivia bullshit but full-context knowledge. If you keep to the useful type, it can’t be overvalued.
Agree on all else.
Operational ability depend on action, delusion is no problem as action makes it all work. Action depends on faith, positive affirmations get you further than critical thinking. People like to claim IQ predicts sucess put this is really a myth, by large for example politicians have completely average IQs, but there’s no absence of high end IQs in the insane asylum and rehab.
So if your transmission goes out, you can rebuild the engine with high initiative and positive affirmations and your car will be fixed?
See that's the difference between an engine and the mind: a person act on what they feel they deserve, similarily society operate that way as well, knowledge can not deduce that as faith is the ingredient. Occupations where all you need is knowledge, like mechanics, are the least valued, in all the rest charisma and feelings are more important.
"A man’s worldview tracks the hierarchy in which he can matter, the coalition willing to dignify him, the enemies he wants license to hate, and the women before whom he needs to seem impressive. Beyond that his “values” are mostly all performative LARPing" while I won't deny there are many men like this, and almost all have this going on to some degree as we are fallible humans and not perfect beings, but the idea that no man has principles beyond self-interest which you seem to infer is complete and utter nonsense, that one would have to assume must be a projection of your very own character onto others.
Hey buddy fuck you.
I don't disagree with any of this, but it's really hard to find meaning in life when the rules and norms that you've exposed, turn out to be so cynical, self-interested and transactional. But I guess this essay isn't for me. Or if I'm being honest, I'm a man who has no power. So my opinion will never matter.
This is excellent work.
I focus on ethical, moral, legal, and political deception. But I love how you've teased out the way we lie to ourselves, and others, about ourselves. While I bucket this under status signaling, the detail and clarity you've produced here is gold. Well done. -CD
i didn't know men were capable of such depth
Wtf, so many words and complex barely readable sentence structure. I was THIS 🤏 close to "I'm not reading allat".
"An idiot admires complexity, a genius admires simplicity, a physicist tries to make it simple, for an idiot anything the more complicated it is the more he will admire it, if you make something so clusterfucked he can't understand it he's gonna think you're a god cause you made it so complicated nobody can understand it. That's how they write journals in Academics, they try to make it so complicated people think you're a genius", - Terry Davis
Well done.
The only thing I'd add is that some degree of it's adaptive--I was vaguely aware of these, tried to avoid doing them, and as a result when once asked to list my strengths couldn't come up with any.