Original Philosophy, which was simply the study of the natural world to try and discover its rules, laws and truths, use to be the literal arguing between friends.
The very word philosophy is a combination of the words Philos (friend) which funnily enough is my own surname, and Sophia (story or history).
But arguing was not then the chicken-squawking most done today, and most exemplified by women, who will just shout out insults or their idiotic opinion without the substantiation of any kind of objective fact, logical observation, or even tenuous link to reality whatsoever. Even the “better” versions are mere rhetorical shots straw-manning a false argument.
The procedure for correct arguing by intellectually honest men (women have largely a biological incapacity for intellectual honesty, which is why no female philosophers of any note have ever really existed) is as follows:
1. Present your axioms and agree them in principle as being valid, even if only for the purposes of the hypothetical argument being presented.
2. Present your premises, and again, have them accepted, even if only temporarily, for the sake of the argument, unless the opponent can conclusively dismiss a premise by appeal to facts in evidence to both sides that prove the premise is flawed or erroneous to begin with.
3. Logically work through the axioms and premises to make your hypothesis.
4. Check your logic and thinking with your opponent, inviting valid criticism of the thought process used to come to the hypothesis, based on the agreed upon axioms and premises.
5. Modify the hypothesis on the basis of your joined thought experiment of creating a hypothesis using the agreed upon axioms and premises that work at least in theory.
6. State the hypothesis clearly.
7. Check the real world and/or run experiments to see if the hypothesis is plausible.
8. Use the hypothesis to predict how reality will look based on it.
9. Check if the predictions are correct. And not the frequency. If always correct, then the hypothesis is assumed to be valid at least until a set of results that fits the axioms and premises produces an unexpected result. At that point the theory needs revising/adjusting/correcting until it once again is useful for the prediction of events that fit the criteria.
The arguing part, between honest men, has zero ego in it. Arguing is not about who is “right” winning. Arguing has always intended to be a way to discover the truth. It is certainly the case that a more intelligent person van usually see things more clearly and therefore more often come to correct conclusions and thus better theories of how reality works. I have personally only ever felt euphoria at someone better able than I at, not only managing to see or work out some aspect of reality, but helping me see it too!
But the chickenheads (and women, because they are wired to believe everything is about them specifically) get upset instead of happy if anyone other than them proves a point. Because all they care about is appearance and ego, and not at all about truth.
The biological nature of a woman means that any time anything that is perceived by her as a critique of anything she thinks or does, her emotions flare up. This is because (as per Caveman Theory) the main survival pressure for women has been other women, so anything that can appear to be a criticism of her or her ways, lowers her perceived value in the group of women (and therefore, in turn, by social dynamics, among the men who are available to them). And because women primarily use such tactics to overcome other women and place themselves in a better position vis a vis securing the best available man, the emotions immediately run to the sensation of having to ward off an attack.
Which is why a woman will tend to degrade to personal insults, past errors or flaws (real or imagined) and completely separate issues that have nothing at all to do with the argument at hand. Specific and detailed excuses that are supposedly the reason X or Y was not done, or done badly, will persist for YEARS even when the thing not being achieved is the same one.
For example, my wife is constitutionally incapable of ever being on time. And in every one of the probably thousands of times I brought this issue up, she inevitably had 47 different unique reasons why she was late that specific time. And a whole different and unique 47 reasons for each of the other 2,100 times it happened in the last 7 years. I used to inevitably mention that she must be the unluckiest human being on Earth, and even that is not an excuse, because after a few decades on Earth of you KNOWING that by nefarious magic, every year, after year, day after day, event after event, you ALWAYS manage to have all these wildly unexpected things happen to make you late, well, a normal person would set off 2 hours early on average and thus arrive on time!
This would make her most upset at how unfair and evil I was for blaming her for the obviously unpredictable nature of having to consider things like getting dressed. Or putting shoes on. Or selecting which dress. You know what I mean, wild, wild, unexpected stuff that only happens once in a blue moon when you decide to go somewhere.
Now, in case you are wondering, no, everything is fine between my wife and I and I have grudgingly accepted that there are many other theories this immutable law of her tardiness could be related to. For example:
* Charitably, God could be trying to teach me patience, mercy, and compassion.
* Less charitably, I am burning off some of the many years in purgatory I will have before me if I manage to get in.
* Secularly, Time flows differently in her aura of local space-time and my more powerful aura of local space-time overwhelms hers and thus the perceived locus of interference results in a minor disruption of our combined local space-time. This is most likely the best theory, since we both experience a definite sense of irritation and general wrongness of the other person’s invasive and disruptive space-time aura. I’m sure all you physicists agree with me. There is also further evidence of this because with all other conditions being equal, a trip to the supermarket by me can invariably never take as much as an hour, regardless of how busy the place is, while by her can never take less than one hour, and often closer to two, even if all tills are open and free of any other people shopping. Clearly evidence of time flowing differently. But wait! There is more! Regardless of how much free shelf/table/counter spaces I make available to her, they will ALWAYS become overfilled. Left to my own devices, I on the other hand have endless open horizons of counter tops. Clearly physical space operates differently for each of us.
Also, it is a certain fact that she will be unlikely to take my explanation of the above phenomena as the charitable and loving attempt it is to help her better understand the complexity of local space-time topology and how we each affect it uniquely, and is more likely to unfairly accuse me of maligning her in some public shaming event.
Yet, due to my calm and loving nature, I will accept the inevitable texts she will send me regarding this post in a spirit of saintly charity and patience. Which I am sure she will appreciate and return in kind.
Anyway, putting aside local space-time warping, the point I am making is that the art (and science) of proper arguing, is almost entirely lost.
Even most men have devolved to tantrum throwing little girls who just want their flying unicorn, and ice cream too. It really doesn’t even rise to the level of amusing rhetoric, or, you know, very plausible new theories on personal space-time aura interference.
Even supposedly professional “debates” have become mere spectacle and cheap entertainment, none of them rising to the level of being educational. The only partial exception that comes to mind are the debates of William Lane Craig, but even then it is at best 50%. Craig is capable of arguing correctly, but I have yet to see any one of his opponents being able to do so.
The fact that Craig is a Protestant is quite astonishing to me, and in fact, I am now toying with the idea of writing to him to see if he would debate me on Catholicism vs. Protestantism.
He is certainly far more prepared than I am in things like knowing Bible verses (albeit probably from the wrong versions of the Bible), but that in itself is not an issue, because the point is the logical truth of Catholicism vs Protestantism. Not “winning”. That is, I have absolutely zero fear or anxiety about such a debate, if it were to take place, because my concern is not my ego or my need to “win”, but rather, simply to advance my (or his, or the observers’) understanding of the Universe and the God who created it.
Of course, against intentional deceiver and liars like Jay Dyer, then I do not deny that there is a level of pleasure I take in squashing their ego with the equivalent of a steam roller. But that is still merely secondary to the position of increasing the level of understanding of reality.
Anyway, that is my rant for today done.
Advice to Sub-Optimal Men
This Xeet prompted this post.
Note the 27,000 reposts, and in case the writing is too small, here are the 4 images the commenter “Myka” does not give any fucks about at all.
Now my general feeling on this sort of thing is that the men who whine about this just need to grow a pair. Or not, and die without reproducing, with any luck.
And of course that no man at all should ever reproduce in any fashion, or even have any sex, whatsoever, indeed ANY involvement at all with women like Myka. If men followed this sensible advice, within about a month, the entire world would be aflame with how all men are evil and so on. After about a year, feminists would have almost died out, and after a decade the only feminists left would be in mental institutions for the unfortunately insane.
But I am trying to be more compassionate and understanding to those men that have been already crushed by life, their single mothers, or whatever. Maybe you’re a short, hairy goblin with nothing going for you. And it would be unfair for me to simply tell you to “man up” if you understand that in the context of you being able to marry a supermodel not being possible only because of your lack of confidence.
So let me spell things out.
Absolutely you need to change what you can. Get fit, make sure you are always clean, dress better, shave or laser your over-hairy ass, improve your job prospects and career, and so on. Sure, do all of that, but above all, the ONE thing you absolutely CAN do is fish in your level.
As a man you should be able to be brutally objective. So first fix all you can reasonably fix. Then give yourself a fair rating.
Personally, even when I had hair, i never rated myself above a 7 or so, even if objectively I knew that for a not insignificant number of women I was definitely at least an 8 in looks. And in ambition and what I was doing in life, again, for any woman overly concerned about material wealth I have fluctuated from a 2 to an 8 and in some cases a 9, but any woman that understood my nature at all was more liable to rate me a 6 or at most a 7. What I always had in spades however was an unflinching dedication to simply be me. Regardless of what anyone else thought of it. And that, at least temporarily, despite all my other numbers being lower or even much lower, made me at least an 8 and often an 8.5 or even 9.
I provide all the different metrics because unlike men, women do not rate us simply on looks.
It is not a councidence that most of my girlfriends, and certainly all the ones I was interested in to some more or less serious degree were invariably rated at least as 8s by men that generally had been successful with women and often as 9s and rather often as 10s by all the men who had been more averagely successful with women. Many a time I have been told by literally dozens of co-workers from multiple companies, that I was “punching above my weight” and more than once at various large company Christmas parties I was noticed by literally the entire firm, including the owners who would act deferentially to me despite me being merely one of the several people at my level they employed.
I have literally had random strangers stop me and a woman I was with in the street to congratulate me for the beauty of the woman I was with. And even today, I get friends who, without in any way saying this to “get in my good graces” rave about my wife.
I am not telling you this to depress you or show off.
I am trying to explain to you an important point that if you can internalise it will aid you in your quest for a genuine, long term companionship, marriage and a family more than any other single thing you can do.
The reason I did so well, was because I correctly evaluated all my metrics and played to my strengths. And my strengths are absolutely real, forged in the deepest fire of personal self-knowledge.
I have turned down large amounts of money, very hot women, and all sorts of other things in order to not do anything that would compromise my own sense of integrity. So, bending to some temporary whim of a pretty woman was never in the cards for me. This, of course, has the effect of immediately seeing off pretty much any woman who is not a full blown psychopath/narcissist but has those tendencies. Their need for some form of manipulative control over the man (victim?) they select simply drives them crazy when faced with someone of my temperament.
On the plus side, normal women wired in a healthy way, tend to be attracted to that level of confidence (so do all the pretty but damaged ones, which brings up another set of problems we won’t go into here).
The point is that deep and true self-knowledge is always the key. That is step one. Step two is to improve all you can, but it is step three that is the absolute silver bullet insofar as one exists:
Look in your own range.
It would probably be difficult for a guy that is 5’5”, has the genes of predisposition to fatness, is born poor and has a single mother raising him, to have the same level of hard-headed conviction I seem to have been born with. And I absolutely believe part of it is due to my Aspergers, which does not present as such due to high IQ and the luck I had in my rather unusual early life. But the point is that if I had been born in that body but retained my mental attitude, I would probably have been comfortably married a lot sooner, have more children and my friends would rave about how kind and pleasant my wife is. And she would probably be a 6 or maybe a 7 at most. Because that is where I would fall overall if you removed the physical advantages I have.
But let’s say you are overall just a 2.
I actually know people like this. Literal cripples with disfiguring handicaps, no real money or any special prospects. And yet both the ones I know personally are happily married and have been for years. One studied hard, became a lawyer, made money, then travelled to the East and essentially “bought” a filipino wife, being brutally honest with her. He really is about a 2 and she is about a 5 or at most a 6. But his overall number is probably a 4. He is wealthy. And the difference between a possible 4 and 6 is his level of self-knowledge. When I first met him and we spoke a bit he simply stated exactly what I said above and his wife was present. They had been married and living in London for over ten years. He praised her for being loyal and helping look after him. Maybe she was more nurse than wife. Maybe there was a financial arrangement we know nothing of. But his wife did not look or present as miserable and neither did he.
The other guy is married to a woman that also has some physical handicaps. They clearly love each other, have been together for decades and she is a very kind and decent person no one can say a bad word about.
The point is that both men went after a woman within their own numbers.
As did I. And let me tell you that the search at the lower end of the pool, once you accept this truth, is FAR easier than at the “pretty” end of the pool.
The reason was well known to me even decades ago, as is evident by one of my very first posts back in 2007 in a now permanently parked ancient blog (Take note of the relevant image here.)
And has been known by men worldwide at least since the days if the crazy/hot matrix of the early 1990s.
So. Do not despair. It’s only 4 simple rules:
1. Fix what you can fix externally (looks, hygiene, clothing, income, etc.)
2. Chose who you are internally. Learn and know deeply who you really are, so no matter the situation, you will almost always already know how you will react to it. If you are mot how you wish to be yet, do whatever you need to do to become it.
3. Rate yourself honestly in all categories and hence in the overall number you are and then go fish in the pond of your own level.
4. Do not despair. Just correct any errors and persevere.
That’s it.
If you want more detail and context you might also want to get Caveman Theory, but honestly if you just do the 4 steps above, you will eventually succeed.
And never forget point n. 4.
No related posts.
By G | 10 September 2024 | Posted in Caveman Theory, Caveman Theory, Female Socio-Sexual Hierarchy, Increasing Happiness, Relationships, Social Commentary