aurum

This is only true if you consider intelligence to be relative and socially constructed.

High: Places a strong value on truth and honesty. Meta-awareness of honesty as a self-image, seeks to go beyond. Of course this is tricky because even low-perspectives think they value truth. But given everything I know about Ralston, I think it's safe to assume this is coming from a high-perspective.

According to this source, up to 130 fake MAGA-related meme coins have spun up: https://www.ccn.com/education/fake-trump-coins-scam-warning/ Trump himself obviously did not start these coins, but his actions certainly encourage it.

Drain the swamp. https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/22/trump-ethics-pledge-order-lobbying-00199908

Juxtoposition between high and low perspective: Low: Trump believing in the self-deception that he deserves authority over others. Lying and applying force to gain power. Decrease in sovereignty. High: Pence putting democracy above personal political and career agenda. Respects truth. Increase in sovereignty.

Fair enough. I shouldn't have assumed that was your position. I'm also not convinced collapse is inevitable though. I think the most likely outcome is that systems are not going to change and collapse will be local but not total. Collapse is a spectrum. Worrying too much about civilization collapse will have you do some very stupid things.

The metacrisis framework offers a high quality perspective. I appreciate the work being done by people involved in it. But it's still limited. And it's still subject to group-think like everything else. There's the error. The ship is not going to change course.

We've already had several conversations about my perspective. 2 years is not nearly enough to gain a big-picture understanding of our collective situation.

Just think about it.

You are stuck in metacrisis group-think.

Much time left until what?

More Pam Bondi devilry. She made millions off the Truth Social merger, I'd call that a strong conflict of interest for attorney general. https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-ag-pick-pam-bondi-made-3-million/story?id=117784776

I meant winning or losing in terms of what is more popular. Not health outcomes. Obviously health should be the goal of any diet.

Yeah that's possible. I don't think it's all for show. It's a mix. A lot of the biohackers gravitate towards animal-based diets, but veganism is popular too. Hard for me to say which group is winning.

He is swimming in LA and silicon valley group think. Veganism is just part of it.

The more I've looked into what his whole project is about, the less I like what I see. His whole philosophy is completely bankrupt. He thinks he can unify the world under the premise of "not-dying". He thinks we will be the first generation of humans to live forever. He thinks we should give over our lives to AI algorithms. He wants to build a global movement. He is buddy-buddy with RFK and wants to collab with him and Trump. And he is very articulate and skilled at presenting it so it all sounds reasonable or even genius. The whole thing reeks of devilry to me. Something is afoot here, despite whatever positives we might also say about him.

You would think given how much he talks about him being data driven. But no. Vegan came first, protocol second.

He's stated many times he is vegan by choice. He started the protocol as a vegan and has adjusted his protocol around it.

You sick normie Do you even have a crystal?

Be highly skeptical of all things new age. I fell for way too much of that stuff.

Good breakdown. More thinking like this about this debate. We could also add to the high perspective list systems thinking. One should see the complex feedback loops that lead to veganism or not veganism.

@Buck Edwards great job! Way to challenge yourself.

Not a chance in hell.

These are not strict fallacies of the left. They are fallacies used in general, including by the right. The only one that has some correlation with the left is #3. But this is because leftists are generally more educated, more interested in truth and at a higher cognitive development level. I agree with @Sincerity. This feels quite biased and not like a critique from above.

I would believe that you can. I would not extrapolate that to the majority of other women. They mostly will not notice or even care to notice. They will just feel attraction, and their perspective will get backwards rationalized from there. It is indeed a lefty talking point because lefties can't stand redpill / PUA guys. They are everything wrong with the world from a leftist POV. They promote patriarchy, misogyny, materialism, capitalism, lying and generally head over heart. So of course lefties generally deny its effectiveness. If they admitted it was effective, they'd have to admit it has some validity.