Ulax

@How to be wise My agreement with your point of view would rest, to my mind, on what way a stage yellow thinker could come to be 'right wing'. To me, there's a big difference in supporting a right wing party because (1) It seems the decision that will produce the best systemic outcomes in a certain context, and (2) Supporting right wing parties because you agree with the ideological underpinnings of right wing parties. In general, the latter seems pretty non-sensical because, to my mind, most right wing parties have political ideologies which refute systems thinking. And you cant be a stage yellow systems thinker who refutes systems thinking.

@StarStruck Overall, I think the views this youtuber expresses here are somewhat accurate. However, I see what I think are major flaws. I also am suspicious of his motives. Firstly, I'd say he's within the paradigm of 'Everything is about survival' when it comes to relationships. And, I agree with that. Secondly, I would like to see what sources he cites for his beliefs. It appears to me he is attempting to fit into the category of a competent professional psychologist and my views are thus more credible. However, I wonder why he doesn't cite sources for his arguments. Accordingly, I feel somewhat suspicious of his motives. I am wary that he may just trying to get into the manosphere market, whilst avoiding the critiques levelled at people like Tate by talking in a very professional manner, and implying the image that his views are based on credible sources. That said, I think if that is the case and he becomes popular, I think he could represent a success in cancelling Tate. In terms of catering to the Tate audience, but in a less incendiary and more mature manner. Though I suspect he lacks the personality to get much of Tate's previous market share. Thirdly, I think a flaw in his views is that he doesn't account for attachment theory in his worldview. In his use of rational, it appears to me that the talker is arguing that, be it consciously or unconsciously, women select the highest value guy they can get. However, I think the truth is women select the highest perceived value guy they can get. A women with a disorganised attachment type will often look, to my understanding, for a partner who she feels both a sense of connection to and unsafety around, and will actually want abuse at an unconscious. A securely attached women would not want someone who abuses her. Therefore, to my mind, these two women would perceive different men as maximising their survival interests. So, I suppose my point here is that the talker makes the mistake of not accommodating for how attachment styles affect what a women determines to be attractive in a potential partner. Fourthly, I think he doesn't account for how cultural influences potentially affect the value men and women put on relationships. I.e. just because men in 2023 USA don't value them as highly, doesn't mean its intrinsic to men not to value them as highly. Its possible, to me, that a differently socialised male population could value them as highly or even higher.

@Jowblob I think there are different interpretations of Peterson's ideas surrounding being a monster. I think there are lower consciousness ways, i.e. putting on a persona of being tough. And higher consciousness ways, i.e. jungian shadow integration.

@Bobby_2021 Here is my perspective. I'd say concentration type meditation is pretty great, in my opinion. I find it gives me a firm sense of self and feel more safe. Hence, I get less triggered. And i think you can get quick improvements with that. Using relaxation methods when triggered, such as breathing techniques. Using relaxation techniques at certain point(s) during the day, so you are just in a baseline calmer state. Understanding high consciousness psychological theories, such as non-violent communications, and defence mechanism theories. Doing deep inner shadow work, i.e. depth psychotherapies, exploring past via journaling, psychedelics. Having multiple deep, intimate friendships. Socialising a lot. Ego transcendence I.e. spiritual work.

@Jowblob In what way would you say that its more complicated? And I don't really understand your stated opinions concerning god in this context.

@supremeyingyang You don't believe in astrology?

@Nilsi I find that possibility very sad. I believe the value of human life to be ever present, despite whatever perceived transgressions one may do.

Hey, Anyone here have knowledge about doing trataka meditation? If so, I'd be hoping for tips regarding concentrating on an object in my minds eye. (as opposed to some object in my field of view) Thanks in advance.

@Someone here Would you class yourself as a systemic thinker?

@StarStruck Fairs man. We can have differing opinions.

@StarStruck I think its definitely a pick up topic. But I don't want to debate further about whether it is or not.

@ZenAlex I've been very numb for decades now. I've spent most of my adult life so far focused on the resolving this issue. My current theoretical understanding is that you need to process some significant unconscious emotion(s), and then the numbness will go. So deep shadow work would be my recommendation. Also, it might be that the idea that you need to process something deeply from your past surprising. But I'd offer the perspective that it might be that you are actually just dissociated from some trauma from your past, (side note: I'd include neglect as abuse. From what I've seen it seems neglect can often lead to numbness)

@Lila9 I think I get you. I like the idea of a separated sub-forum for pickup, and agree with your points of view. @Leo Gura Perhaps this separate forum section is something to consider?

@Bob Seeker Lol!

@Judy2 I empathise with your viewpoint. However, I think there is a case here of distinguishing between the ways things are and the way we want things to be. In my opinion, when it comes to actually understanding sexual attraction you have to be willing to entertain some harsh truths. Female to male attraction, and male to female attraction simply operate very differently. Male self esteem simply matters way more than female self esteem when it comes to the how much it affects sexual attractiveness. And, physical attractiveness is way important for females when it comes to sexual attractiveness. And good pickup is very grounded in understanding these sexual dynamics and how to increase male sexual attractiveness, when it comes to casual relationships. I can imagine that being a woman and reading these sorts of threads can be disturbing. But I sense the here the issue is you actually find the reality of female-male sexual dynamics disturbing. And although I empathise, I think you need to take the personal responsibility of avoiding threads about female-male sexual dynamics, if it affects you. In my opinion. these sorts of threads will always occur on a forum that caters for real, grounded self development in regards to increasing male sexual attractiveness. That said, if stuff breaches guidelines, I'd recommend reporting it. And, also, I'm not endorsing any comments where people may make a pejorative judgment about a certain sex on the basis of how attraction works, i.e. saying that women are bad because they ignore sexually unworthy guys, or endorsing guys who take their views from red pill theories, which are really seemingly just self-serving narratives. However, I don't see any of that happening on this thread. Also, @Lila9, I think when female 'value' is talked about in the pickup community, its not talking about a women's value as a person, i.e. what she deserves from life, or how she deserves to be treated. Instead, its talking about a female's value in the context of 'male-female sexual dynamics', i.e. what typically scores a women points when it comes to her level of sexual attractiveness. That said, a lot of guys can make the mistake of conflating the two things, and doing things like objectifying women, or even just use this understanding to justify some misogynistic worldview. I don't want to paint too pretty a picture of the pick up community, but there is nuance to this stuff.

@Someone here I'd say the following. Liberalism can seem childish when people are very empathetic but intellectually uneducated. I wouldn't say its childish, more somewhat uneducated. The childish seeming liberal sees correctly that how everyone act is totally understandable, and that really no one is really to blame. So, the childish seeming liberal is high conscious in the sense that they recognise that where people end up at in life isn't their fault. However, the lack of education means that such liberal is inept at understanding or creating competent systems of cause and effect that would help people. And, they can create well-meaning but very flawed systems in their effort to help. This is where i'd sort of put some of stage green people at. Liberals at a higher point have that same empathy but with a deep intellectual understanding of systems of cause and effect. Such that they understand the systems which cause people to act as they do, and also understand how to create helpful systems. This is where I'd put yellow folk at. To my mind, this liberal would argue that neither the gun, nor the person alone kills someone. Instead, the interplay of systems of cause and effect kill people. The conservative is actually way less conscious than even the childish liberal because they lack both the empathy and the intellectual understanding. They have an incredible lack of understanding of systems. To such an extent that they do not even believe in systems of cause and effect. This allows them to be utter devils. And they go round, often in complete ignorance, altering/ creating very unhelpful systems of cause and effect. They often have a high lack of collective responsibility, and their understanding of personal responsibility is very flawed, in my opinion. Flawed because they have a great lack of understanding around why they do what they do, and they never actually had the ability to choose to do otherwise than they actually did. They do not understand that their successes in life were only possible because systems of cause and effect produced that success. Conservatives are forever spitting into the wind, and then blaming the spit. I tend to see a conservative as easily the most childish. They have very relatively undeveloped minds. Stage blue on the spiral.

I've heard Portugal have a kind of unique policy on psychedelics. But not too sure on that one

@Optimized Life I'd slightly late to the party here but I'd say go for the massage. I think its important to find enjoyable ways to destress whilst doing game.

@StarStruck I'm speaking more from my theoretical knowledge, but if you transcend the ego I believe then you can access unconditional love

@UnbornTao Hey. I don't quite understand your question. Are you asking me about whether I, personally, have sources of overstimulation in my life? Or something else?

@Tanz I get your point about it not being news. I see how you might see news as being something which is more about reporting on current events. However, I think that if you get some real political science under your belt, you are able to read news sources in a way more critical way.

@StarStruck It could be you're not actually falling for her but experiencing limerence. Its a codependence behaviour.

@Optimized Life It can give you great frame control, which is, to my understanding, a foundational aspect of male attraction. Also, in my opinion, your emotional vibration will likely end up being higher, and what you feel she feels, so she is going to feel relatively better around you. Therefore, you will typically provide more value, and are typically more attractive

@Kalki Avatar I think an actualized school could end terribly. I think its very important to understand experts in certain fields are only experts in those fields and not in all fields. To run a radical school like an actualized school would take real expertise in fields I don't think Leo is an expert in.

@hyruga I feel like Paul has got it.