Natasha Tori Maru

That's cool, I thought it was a misunderstanding as you could read into it 😁

@AtmanIsBrahman So what do the numbers mean? How was it decided one number means a certain level of attractiveness? What studies were done to come to that conclusion that one number means more regarding beauty than another? All evidence I find tells me looksmaxxing is more than these geometric principles - there are other elements to it. Does looksmaxxing exclude skincare, hair care, clothing selection, body composition? These have existed for a long, long time. If they are part of looksmaxxing, this is nothing new. You say beauty is objective - is this absolute? I claim it is not at all. Some things are more attractive, but there are massive variances across culture and personal preference. I cannot make out your answer and it you are using objective as a blunt absolute term or you think there is some nuance? Beauty is either subjective or objective. Can it ever be subjective to you?

@Rishabh R I am unsure how your point relates to mine? I am claiming it's not a good thing to do, forum or not.

I do shit (shit#1) - then shit (shit#2) occurs afterwards. Shit#1 and Shit#2 appear to be associated. But in reality, all I can say is one shit is happening then another. I am making a connection between the two shits - via inference - up in my head? I got to this based on determinism / free will and reviewing this thread: Confused with free will I don't think I can say anything else other than "I observe some pattern of shit, some regularities of said shit, and some sequences of shit" Correct me if I am wrong - but I am making this connection up?

@AtmanIsBrahman if you don't want to address the questions then just say it. I don't require your assumptions. I require answers. AI isn't an answer. I want to know how you came the certain conclusions - all you are doing is proving you adopted someone else's, and cannot show how they got there with your own words. I can relink my original question set if you like? You are making the claim that looksmaxxing is new. It's got validity. I am questioning that. I want you to display how you understand it. I am not going to research this because I want to know how YOU came the the conclusion this was valid. Showing how you checked validity. All I can decifer is that you jumped on a trend and haven't thought about it, and taken on someone else's conclusion as authority IE group think If you can show me your own thoughts I wouldn't suspect the above.

@AtmanIsBrahman my guy. I'm asking to see YOUR data. YOUR critical thinking. Data and how you got to your conclusions. YOU. I don't want an AI answer where you let someone else dictate how to think and you repeat it without any sort of analysis. I think I've asked some good questions. If you could have a think and find sources (ai isn't a source) that back up your claim that would be great! You didn't even scratch my questions. I'm basically forming a claim that looksmaxxing is nothing but a rebrand with maths of concepts that always existed. Looksmaxxing isn't just a psl, angle optimisation. Your AI response even says the research isn't solid. It's contested?? The copy pasta no brain AI response doesn't address even half the questions. Why are you letting AI do all your thinking research and deductive reasoning?

Insisting our view is the correct one, putting others down when they do not align. Pretending this is done for others own good. That there is virtue behind the actions. To teach. Leo does this. And so are others in this thread. Interesting.

@AtmanIsBrahman you are just repeating a claim. Can you please support it? How are you personally seeing that people weren't analysing each part of the face 40 years ago? Can you please supply some research, or historical timelines for the development behind looksmaxing? Do you realise 40 years ago was 1986? Photoshop and it's effects have been replicated with cosmetics for a long, long time. Millenia timescales. Can you show me some data that reports all men agree to the same nose being attractive, the same face dimensions, the same geometry? How do you explain beauty preferences that differ across culture and the data available there? Can you show me data that confirms all people agree that certain celebrities are attractive? That would substantiate "objective" a bit more. Repeating statements isn't building as case.

@AtmanIsBrahman Beauty is not so rigid as to be objective. Can you show me some historical data and links to support none of this existed prior to you encountering it as trend? Can you tell me where the basis for these rules came from? Can you tell me how long they existed for, prior to adoption to faces? Can you give me some evidence to support that others didn't use any of these concepts previously? If you could also share how you came to the conclusion these principles made for 'better aesthetics'? How did you get there from the principles? How exactly do these principles enhance appearance? What elements of beauty are they engaging? How are you deciding what looks better? Who is deciding this? How does this system account for subjective preference?

Tell me your thoughts - most welcome. @Jirh How so you operate in the world, in terms of agency? I view myself as simply taking action when the highest probability for a certain outcome arises, to possibly affect a desirable outcome. I move as if I have no ultimate control, and I am at the mercy of any possibility that may arise. I aim to accumulate the wisdom to know when to act, and this is all. Lower stress because there isn't an attachment to outcome. Surprise when things go my way. But to conceptualise cause is my own inference, and that 'happenings' just occur. WHAT. I realise all I have been doing is noticing sequences, patterns and trends/regularity/frequency. And acting based on my accumulated feedback from experience in reality. I don't want to think about it too much because I feel as if it is just... MAGIC. Everything just. HAPPENS.

@LordFall You have a solid amount of life experience and attending to what is relevant and highest priority - so this naturally means you have the wisdom to know when to stop, when to pivot and reallocate resources and when diminishing returns take effect. When we reach this stage of development - these ingrained good habits become so natural to us, it can appear to be simple & intuitive. But when you take the lid off and approach from a less experienced persons mindset - there are many aspects to consider that mean that one size doesn't fit all. And peril can be close without critical thinking. Really questioning and critically analysing a method or concept helps others find where they personally align with a subject. tl;dr Expertise / experience often squishes complexity down into intuition. But that intuition is built on countless judgments, mistakes, and refinements that newer people haven't yet learned and internalized. Critical analysis helps fill the gap, rather than simply asking others to trust the conclusion. And taking on some conclusion without thinking is one of the largest pitfalls in modern society.

Is it straight forward? How far do you take this? Does everyone need to value this? Where are diminishing returns taking affect? How does substance work into this? How do you know your potential? What markers indicate when you cap potential? What are the limits to just appearance having an effect on reality? Does this affect anything other than base impression and treatment? How do you qualify it's direct, causative affect on outcome? What does it affect? How long for? What is this doing psychologically, if potential is limitless? When does seeking become anxiety? How do you know when to stop? How do you determine how much effort to put in? How much resources should go to this endeavour? I can think of more. So, is it straightforward? Love the process. Not the outcome. Otherwise it's an endless desire loop that can breed dissatisfaction with the now. With being.

@Jodistrict appreciated 💫🙏🏻

@Sugarcoat right, so then I riffed off your point 😃

Armchair psychology.

Ever noticed that once you are aware of something, when you care less about it - you get better at it? The concept of "maxing" is the flaw. An endless striving loop. Awareness is all you need, but giving too many fucks is going to trap you in an anxious loop from hell. Not to mention, no one is attending to what @Sugarcoat raised: by telling yourself you need to become or be or do something to get "it" (whatever it may be, in this case, being good looking) - you are actually reinforcing you are not it. Not good looking, need to be. It's no secret looks matter. But maximizing? Endless striving? "Maxing" is the issue. It's a warning this can slide into bad things. Not for all. Not always. Be be aware. Looks optimising. Cool. Watch attachment to the material. It's the human fallacy of "more is better" that can be smuggled into the concept. I say, watch out for that!

A fun prompt I found that was sort of revelatory, as I didn't expect the reply: "Tell me what assumptions I have repeated so often that you now treat them as fact when talking to me" No obligation to post replies, but below was mine:

@LordFall Women have engaged in looksmaxing for millenia. It's a substantial part of their interactions with each other. And consumer culture. My point is - this isn't new. It's not revolutionary. The majority of people don't "avoid talking about it"

Let's take it seriously!! https://youtu.be/WLsHZznqrMY?si=_ZNuG_SCWz1oKPs6

E X A C T L Y excellent lesson, glad to be of assistance 😃

@AtmanIsBrahman I am saying it genuinely appears you are assuming others don't know looks effect how others perceive you. Do you think emphasising this is for the good? What could it be achieving that is negative? What positive? What do you think are long term issues?

You've been pushing this narrative for a while. It could possibly appear as if the assumption is we do not know.

Hashimoto's. I am lucky to, otherwise share @Elliott's experience. But two of my close family members have motor neurone disease. It's hard.

This is salient. There are tons of negatives to aging. Even if we drum up a list (which would be easy, imo) I sort of wonder what sort of weight each point would carry against your statement above (personal for everyone). Because it moves toward a sort of equanimous peace and gratitude based state of being. Which isn't guaranteed either, but powerful. Man, the pain of getting old. Like, literally pain - that gets me. I think it is short sighted putting too much weight on the aesthetics of aging as a negative. It's mostly done by those who are too young to yet feel their health erode and pain arise. Idgaf about saggy tits if my basic existence is punctuated by pain and suffering. Poor health / chronic medical issues. Quality of life is priority for me, over longevity.

Can you brainstorm up some good things about aging?