Natasha Tori Maru

The OP of that thread is not flowerfaeiry. If that is who you mean. Could be another commenter. OP is another member who left.

https://youtube.com/@amandamontellpodcasts?si=jdGzWiQZz257glat This podcast is a good example of applying the term "cult" in a non-binary way. The hosts approach each movement looking at it from the lens of "cultish" qualities, and discuss how the frame fits across the spectrum of labels. They stretch the label to it's limits. Some of the podcasts are like squishing a square peg in a triangle hole. But interesting to see the cult frame used in a way that isn't totally negative.

The Best Way To Learn Critical Thinking Yes - AND - I wish to add... It is not like we just learn critical thinking. Oh, I have mastered that! No need to revisit this concept illustrated in the blog post! Use it or lose it. Critical thinking is like a muscle that needs to be exercised regularly with all concepts, ideas and decisions we run into. It can be eroded just as it can be built up. I think we should all be practicing questioning from first principles regularly. And deeply probing into all concepts we run into - ESPECIALLY those from social media, YouTube and online spheres. Often with online rhetoric, there is a slow cognitive drift that occurs as ones algorithm becomes more tailored to their watch history. Never take a concept or idea presented at face value. Always ask questions. What assumptions are being made? What can be inferred? What data or studies is this based on? What other factors could explain this phenomena? Unfortunately, the proliferation of LLM use is not doing much to exercise the muscles of critical thinking. People just shove a question in looking for answers. It is the process of arriving at the answer that is fostering the true skills in gaining wisdom - or, in other words - information can be delivered instantly, but wisdom is developed through the disciplined practice of thinking. Not the answer itself (although the answer can be quite delicious! More so when we have earned it!). Critical Thinking cheat sheet As a side thought, I laugh when I read all the 'hacks' people try to apply to cognition through supplements, little cheats etc. The most obvious cognitive hack to me us just actually USING the brain! If you can't think from first principles, consider purging all short form content and social media until you have retrained your brain to perform in a focused manner.

I know how I logically arrive at conclusions. I want YOU to answer. How did you arrive at the originally stated conclusion? A rhetorical question doesn't tell me that. I can see you are very, very much avoiding answering by issuing rhetoric in both posts addressing me. If you can't answer, that's fine too. Did you arrive at the conclusion, or did you just take Leo's word as truth without any critical thinking? Since you appealed to Leo's ideas and not your own in one answer, it would be fair to infer you adopted a belief.

@OBEler I also recall coming across dialogue / info Jesse Michels being backed by Peter Theil / silicon elites. Even the pace at which his channel blew up is very strange. Does not fit the typical YouTubers growth trajectories. Not sure what to think, personally. I wish I could find the source I originally found around this

Clav reading faces like blueprints I know people like the above Domain expertise is so weird

Okay. That's a different claim to the original one - but thanks for clarifying!

@LordFall That doesn't respond to anything I raised. You added more to support your claim without addressing the shakey claims that the original statement is based on. Divorce has existed historically for thousands of years in various forms. You can verify this. Also you are confusing correlation with causation. Even if societies historically enforced monogamy, that doesn't prove monogamy is inherently unstable.

This rests on the claim that one person should fulfill 100% of your needs - can you tell me a time in history when this was the case? I do not think this is historically the norm - and you can find evidence for this. Humans have always been more community based. This description of monogamy would apply to the more atomized version of society we have only faced in recent time. Not sure about it also resting on the claim that we would be supressing natural biological variance? Could you rap a bit more on that as the meaning isn't clear? As in novelty in sexual partners? We regulate many biological impulses (anger, aggression, selfishness), so the existence of a biological tendency alone doesn't determine what people ought to do.

@LordFall I'm not discussing the concept of hypergamy or what it is. Merely that who uses the term, how it is used, and under what context, act as my own heuristic for determining the likelyhood someone has been consuming a lot of online content from algorithms that can encourage cognitive bias.

Young men talking about it on forums aren't acedemics. Did you miss where I said context matters? These are the nuances that apply to my filter. No, thanks. I don't require advice on learning hypergamy as a concept. I am not calling hypergamy as a concept up for debate. I am critiquing who is using it, and how it is being used as indicators. You might need to re-read what I wrote because you have made some foreign meaning from my words - or I was not clear.

@LordFall it's my personal red flag along with a while bunch of other terms. You're free to disagree with it as a heuristic. I don't care where the term came from because language is descriptive, and not as often prescriptive. Context always matters - that's the other tell I use.

All good 💪 cheers for the rap

@integral how are you defining "above" ? You could be interpreting some foreign meaning from Starax's comment. I am talking about higher consciousness women or mature woman. Hypergamy word use is almost a heuristic for me to tell that one has encountered toxic red pill shit in their social media. @StaraX how are you defining "above" ?

https://youtu.be/RuinHdlpXvE?si=VrOAKccmz1ysFhM4

So you base the original claim on the fact woman want a guy who's above them and leads them? How did you come to this thought? Based on what exactly? I don't want to know how Leo thinks, what he says. I want you know how YOU got to this statement. The logical chain. Where this "women want men who are above them" is derived from. What mechanisms? Sorry but you went straight to a fallacy in logic - appeal to authority. I'm asking YOU 😁

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?

Explain to us your logic here and how you came to this conclusion?

https://isaiprofitable.com/ We are the product. Our data. Our words. Our art. Stolen.

"Produces" is the inference portion to me.

@LordFall Gotcha, cheers for the elaboration

Agree. It signals to me the person is underdeveloped and immature.

@LordFall Do you really think women's standards are why communism doesn't work? How are you accounting for other factors? Wouldn't it be more true to claim "if humans had much weaker status competition, communism would have a better chance at working?" I do not understand what it has to do with women. It is a human issue.

Sorry? I don't understand this

AI cannot answer this.