Natasha Tori Maru

Not quite, I probably didn't formulate my point clearly enough. I’m not arguing that a persons understanding of their own inner experience should automatically be prioritised over another persons interpretation (or that self-report is infallible). My point is much narrower: when we have an inference about someone’s internal state, and that person tells us our inference doesn't match their actual experience, that should be treated as evidence worth considering. It should prompt some healthy doubt about whether our model is accurate (hence why I also raised about gathering information and testing against current models + updating if needed). They may be wrong about themselves, and we may be wrong about them. Neither position should be treated as automatically infallible. But in this specific case, given forum history and context (always asserting how "things are for women" or how "I am", lack of openness in this domain, lack of enquiry or probing questions, demonstrated inability to update models or drop frame, and general uncharitable engagement) my position is well founded.

Can you quote me, or give me some more of your interpretation here? It could simply be that context was lost in the back and forth, because this originally was about a specific interaction with history. I could possibly have branched off in a way that isn't specific to the initial interaction.

So my claim there is that it should be something to be considered. Healthy doubt to test our knowing. This is just a normative/epistemic claim and part of critical thinking. You don't think this is necessary?

I agree with this!

Such a naughty one, this one 😈 NGL I feel this is a result of the dairy industry's influence

Feel free to elaborate.

No, not necessarily. I never said you cannot infer and be accurate. If you read my passage again, I explicitly grant that inference is legitimate. Inference is fine; treating it as knowledge is a problem.

You can believe whatever you want via whatever inference or whatever heuristic you have developed. But it is still inferred. Not known. It is a belief. My heuristic for knowing AION has no idea how I respond internally is his continual and systematic misunderstanding of me throughout our entire history of the forum. The arrogance of thinking we understand someone's internal responses better than they do must also be inspected. This rolls back into having charitable and good faith discussions. There's another distinction underneath this: holding a model of someone vs remaining receptive to evidence that your model is wrong. Models of others are provisional until we have further evidence. AION has a model of how he thinks I would respond. That's fine. But I supplied direct evidence about my actual response, and instead of treating that as information capable of updating his model, he dismissed it. So in this instance it is reasonable to know I (and my internal responses) am being misunderstood.

Perhaps that is the intention (to display his knowledge around general female tendencies) - but the rhetoric used changes the entire statement. And the rhetoric used is to make an assessment about how I work without consideration of outliers and the great variation in people's psychology. AION moved from describing a population-level tendency to making a personal psychological claim about me, while simultaneously dismissing my own report about myself. If you inspect the phrasing: "I know your internal response better than you know you do." Also note - "doubt that" doubts what I personally asserted about myself and how I work. I am being told how I work. There is no listening to what is being said. Compare that to a statement that would not be so personally targeted: The above would be a more nuanced display of general knowledge & tendencies of female psychology. _____ It is fine to make general statements about how some women work. But it is a trap to think all women work the same way. Just as it would be as unfair to say all men are simple slaves to their sex drives and will abandon their wives at the first sniff off younger puss.

@Valach haha Omg! Again trying to tell me how I feel or how I work! How can you not see this? Literally mansplaning. Surely you are aware enough to see how weird you are being?

I wonder if Mike had this in mind when he wrote the book The Penis Has Entered Its Filler Era I love me some snark 😈

Hell yeah - I've been into weights, running, cycling etc for 22 years. As long as you approach with intensity, vary and challenge the body and do cardio and weights you'll be firing on all cylinders. That's 22 years of habit. It's so reflexive I don't think I just do it before I even realise I started. Like getting in the car to go to work or grabbing tp on the toilet, you unconsciously just do it. I'll say though it's sensible to have a balanced wholefood plant based diet with plenty of healthy fats. You can get by on basics, but if you balance and research your needs you can feel a great difference when you get it right. Especially fats. Mind calories and hit protein goals. And chew your food motherfuckers! A lot ! Your boating will go away 😄

This is so weird. You have such a strange take on me based on your seperate beliefs and narratives. I just don't care about all these things. I know some of your values are status and acceptance (external approval). I can only guess you are projecting these onto others (and myself). I suspect I operate so far our of your paradigm you struggle to make sense of me. Owen is so far away from anything I would want, desire or be satisfied with. You are also constantly telling me how I feel and think in your posts. It's weird man.

For someone who submitted such a poor research thesis for his PhD, I cannot say I am surprised AI was used in such a lazy way with very little review (broken down in the video). I think the overall points Mike makes encourage much greater attachment to the physical body, and there isn't enough emphasis on "this body matters, so I will look after it". The issue isn't caring about the body - but making the body into the foundation of identity / value / psychological security. Similar crossover to some of the more problematic extreme views within the looksmaxxing movement (hardmaxxing). I don't think it is good to encourage our wellbeing, identity, worth or security to depend on our bodies being a certain way.

@aurum Cheers for the posts, I found them useful to separate out origin, truth and action rather than muddling them all together - If broken down I see that evolutionary history may provide part of the explanation (especially regarding paternity insecurity as a evolutionary hypothesis / explanation). Applied here that leaves two crucial questions "is the reaction accurate in this particular case?" and "should I act according to the reaction?" The last question there being crucial as it is a value judgement. Also: "I feel aversion" = "something is objectively wrong with her" is a non sequitur.