mr_engineer

It's the biggest, highest-demand application of mathematics in today's world. Your future is secure if you go in this direction. If you're interested in learning about hard sciences with the intention of applying it to solve problems, this tells me that you have the personality of a researcher/expert. So, if I were in your position, I'd look to get into industrial R&D in big tech companies first, then if I see a problem that nobody is solving, I'd look for business-ideas of new and creative products. AI is going to be a very big deal in the future, there are going to be a lot of opportunities for developers to develop the virtual world. Be it virtual money, virtual navigation, virtual characters, etc. Now, if you also know about epistemology, you can use that knowledge to not get lost in it yourself and to help those people lost in the matrix to break out of it! I'd suggest ML and data science. The reason is that it will give you a deep technical foundation and it will help you face your fear of technical complexity. Just work your ass off in college, build a diverse skill-set right now. Now is the time to do that so that you get a good job 4-5 years in the future! This will also land you good summer internships. It's the bold option, for sure. Focus on being a formidable competitor in the marketplace. Take the option with the higher learning-curve right now so that you have the confidence to do what you want to in the future.

I got into simulation software-development, where I was working on an earthquake-simulator. The lifestyle didn't really go with me, though, it was very lonely. Then, I got more interested in philosophy/epistemology and I saw a whole bunch of problems in the education-system. The fundamental problem being that the 'epistemology' or the 'definition of knowledge' of the current education-system is that 'knowledge=words'. This leads to a high emphasis on memorization and regurgitation in the exams. Which is why the exams grade you on your ability to regurgitate the system's narrative (which is disgusting, if you ask me). When I saw this, I saw a big gap in the test-prep industry in India. The test-prep industry here is huge, it is worth $70 billion. And, most of them are wrong about the right way to prepare for the toughest engineering entrance-exam in the world, IIT-JEE. So, I applied my superior knowledge of epistemology, metaphysics and Spiral-Dynamics ('superior' compared to the existing institutes) and devised a new prep-strategy for students for this entrance-exam! Now, I'm launching a new portal. You sound like you have potential as an engineer. Here's my definition of an 'engineer' - someone who solves technically complex problems using technological innovation. Therefore, I'd suggest that you go into engineering. More specifically, Computer Science/AI/Machine-Learning. Even if you don't plan on working in a big tech company long-term, even if you'd like to start your own business, my diagnosis is that you're the type of entrepreneur who would be very good at the R&D of the product. So, I'd highly recommend becoming technically proficient before thinking of entrepreneurship. If your interest in philosophy is application-oriented, you absolutely must get into engineering. Because, science is also 'philosophy' So, if you apply that 'philosophy' to do technological innovation, you're an engineer! No, any kind of math is not 'much needed'. There are some branches of math that are purely in the philosophical domain right now. Especially pure math research is purely philosophical right now. I'll give the branches of math that are in descending order of importance in the marketplace right now: Statistical analysis, data science Numerical Methods, Numerical Analysis Analytical Calculus, Real/Complex Analysis Number Theory Don't think you can just wing it with your course-choices in your undergrad and then magically land a job in the future, don't take your job-prospects for granted. I suspected that the B-Math degree, as enticing as it was at the time, would have put me in a precarious position in the job-market because of the high emphasis on analytical math. I was right. You college kids need to really get in touch with real-world marketplace demands as soon as possible. Your career is on the line here, this is no joke. The competition is stiff.

@Abe27 When I was to enter college, I had a similar dilemma. I was very interested in math, I was getting admission into one of the top math-universities of my country. It would've been a B-Math degree. (No tuition, they would've paid me a stipend). The other option was to go into Mechanical Engineering and get a B.E. in it. (High tuition, no stipend). I chose the B.E. The reason was very simple - I didn't see how I would apply math-knowledge in a competitive job-marketplace. Engineering felt more secure, financially. And, it felt more grounded in reality, I didn't want to lose myself in the weeds of philosophy. Later on, when I saw the application of math in applied science research, I went for an M.S. in Applied Math and I got into those kinds of research-projects. If you're taking a student-loan, please take accounting. You need to in order to find a job in the future. If you're not taking a loan, even then, you need to be thinking about what you're going to do for a living. Now, I'm not saying that you shouldn't get into philosophy, by all means, study it. But, college costs serious money these days and you need to have something to show for it in the future.

I mean, I was hoping to help you cut short the time you'd take to decide whether you wanted monogamy or polygamy. This is how you'd figure it out, by determining your top value in relationships.

@Consept What is your biggest relationship-value? Is it attachment-relationship? Is it sexual compatibility? Is it sexual abundance? On what metric are you evaluating women at this point? Another way to put it is - what would be the 'KPI' of your sex-life?

@Consept Out of curiosity, what kind of sex-life do you want to end up with? Monogamous or polygamous? Because a monogamous individual would not see the future potential of them wanting to be the only one in the future as a 'problem'. If you're fundamentally polygamous, nothing wrong with it. I just don't relate and my advice becomes irrelevant for you if that's you. The ethical dilemma for a monogamous individual would be 'how do I make her feel secure when I'm single and considering multiple options?'. That's what I was answering.

In that case, I don't think it's ethical to date multiple women. Even if you're able to smoothly manage it, you don't want to be in a mindset where the women you're seeing are 'replaceable'. If you're seeing them as replaceable, they will feel objectified. This will repel higher-quality women. So, if you don't think that sex is the end-all-be-all, you should act like it. Women should see you walking your talk and that includes not seeing other women and focusing on one woman at a time. Also, when you don't have multiple women clouding your radar, you're able to make quicker decisions with each woman.

Is it a good habit or bad habit, socially? Is it appropriate or inappropriate? I used to think of it as a bad habit, because I hated it when others did it. Yes, there were those people who kept talking on and on and on. I had two strategies to deal with such people. Either be a good listener and listen to what they're saying, if it's interesting. Or, if they're boring, avoid them. But then, in a recent situation where they wouldn't stop talking, I realized the reason for it. It's that they're not a curious person. And, I realized that not only are they boring right now, they're never going to stop being boring, because they're not learning anything new! Nothing new is entering their mind, because they're not learning. So, my new rule - if they're being boring, it's okay to interrupt them. If they're interesting, they can keep talking! Thoughts?

It's because most dating-coaches see women as a replaceable commodity. The mindset of 'approach thousands of women' means that a specific woman is just a number to you and if things don't work out with her, there's 'plenty of fish in the sea'. I'm not saying that incels aren't responsible for solving this, they are. I'm attempting to explain why they're not going for dating-coaching. Because the OP sounds more like a problem for the dating-coach than the incel.

Oh no, by 'petty conflict', I don't mean, them personally attacking me. (By the way, those who personally attack me don't deserve to talk to me at all.) I mean, a conflict over what would be the right way to do something together as a team. In the conflict I was talking about, the point of disagreement was a fact. I knew a fact she didn't and she kept arguing for it. This was a red-flag, because it signaled closed-mindedness, which would cause much bigger problems in the future. The conflict itself was petty, the stakes weren't that high. But, argumentativeness is a hell no for me. We can be friends but we can't date.

There are a whole bunch of people saying a whole bunch of nasty things about nice guys. That 'they're weak, they're inauthentic, they're manipulative, they're controlling, they're not really nice', blah blah blah. I have finally figured out why that is. It's because dating-coaches really profit from telling you 'you're being too nice, don't be too nice, do this instead'. If they told you the truth, which is that women want a man to be nice and loving towards them, and you should be nice (in smart and pragmatic ways, meaning, if someone asks you for an unreasonable favor, you help them not by doing the favor, you help them by suggesting a better, more convenient alternative), that would not be original. This is a problem. Because we are killing true masculinity by doing this. True masculinity is not about achievement and conquest, it is about giving. It is about sharing your gift with the world. Honestly, I am not proud of the fact that I live in times when 'being nice' is considered a bad thing and selfishness is glorified.

Kay.

Petty conflicts are not 'work in progress'. The one starting them is just being dumb. Either they're being dumb or they don't want a loving relationship. Both of which are dealbreakers for me. 'Work in progress' means that you're doing the work, you're not wasting time and energy on pointless bullshit. I gotta see the work to believe a 'work in progress'! Having issues is not enough to be a 'work in progress', you gotta show that you're doing something about the issues.

No, I don't want her to be perfect, I'm perfectly fine with her being a work in progress. Having said that, dealbreakers are dealbreakers. If you start a pointless conflict, that may or may not be a sign of immaturity. It's not a sign of immaturity, if you don't want a loving relationship and you're okay with petty conflicts. And this doesn't mean that she's unsuitable. She's hot and successful, most men would be happy to be with her. Just not me!

Kay. Just to be clear, you're also talking about a 'loving' relationship, right? Cuz in my definition of 'loving', starting a conflict for no reason is a dealbreaker. By growth, I mean, teaching the other to be in relationship with ourselves. We are unique individuals with unique needs and we should be able to coach the other person into meeting those needs. We shouldn't expect them to know everything coming into the relationship, we should not be relying on 'past experience', in fact, it is healthy to admit that you don't know the other person and how to relate to them before they teach you how to do so. 'Go for broke' is an American term for being ambitious and not clinging too much to security. As I said, careers come and go. You have to have the right priorities in life if you want to die without regrets. Also, relationship-wisdom is very applicable to business. So, there isn't much to lose by prioritizing the relationship and there isn't much to gain from prioritizing the career. The career is meaningless anyways if you're coming back to an empty house. The whole point of the partner wising up is so that she helps with the self-work. I don't see myself as a 'product' to put on the shelf so that 'consumers' (women) can come, see whether they like it and use and throw me. If you prefer a 'finished product' over a 'work-in-progress' which I will always be, cuz I'm not perfect (neither are you), don't waste my time.

My love-language is physical-touch, so cuddling. We are curious about each other, we have a genuine desire to be involved in each other's lives, because we have wisdom to offer to each other. We are good at resolving conflicts. (I was considering asking out one of the hottest women in my circle, but then, she argued with me about something really trivial that I knew better about. So, red-flag, didn't ask her out.) We are willing to help each other grow, because we personally benefit from it. We are willing to go for broke, financially, meaning, we won't hold each other back on that front. We have an abundance-mindset. I cook, she cleans. I like cooking and I have no problem finding women who prefer cleaning. We prioritize the relationship over other things, like the career. Careers can come and go, people can't. These are some good pointers for me apart from sexual-compatibility. You can figure these out just talking to them. Then, when this part works out and there's chemistry, I can ask them out. And, the point of dating would be to figure out sexual-compatibility. Then, once you figure that out, you can marry her and have her babies!

Yeah. I don't approach women because 'she make my dick hard, so me go approach'. I need more knowledge about her to ask her out, I am actively looking for red-flags in hot women. I am very committed to the process of getting into a loving relationship.

A man who is authentic, who wears his heart on his sleeve and who doesn't think with his dick. In other words, a man who actually feels love for women. The reason this is 'nice' for women, is that he has an intrinsic motivation to be morally sound with women. Because such an individual will never cheat on a woman.

@TheGod First of all, good job getting to this point in your personal growth. Most people are not asking this question. It is a very important question and if those who want romantic-relationships ask this question, this can lead to a lot of reform in the family-system, in law, in religion, everywhere. That is exactly right. Sex is not worth all of that effort. For the same reason that going to fancy restaurants, going on fancy vacations and having fancy stuff is not worth slaving away for 60 hours a week at a job you hate. Consumerism does not give you long-term happiness! When you believe that the point of a relationship/dating, as a man, is to 'get laid', you have the dating-mindset of a consumer. You're asking her the question 'how can you make me happy?' You think there is a definite answer to this question, you want her to do something that would make you happy. You define 'compatibility' like this, you go through the struggle of finding this person and in the end, it doesn't work. The root-cause of this dating-mindset is because of the sex sells media and because of online-dating. Sex sells on social-media, actual media, movies, pop-culture and porn. Even in parties, sex is seen as nothing more than a 'fun activity'. The consumeristic mindset is the default mindset for everyone. And, the 'red pill' ideology talks about 'SMV', which is, how to pander to the consumeristic mindset of women. What this leads to, is a dating-culture that's heavily transactional. So, if your question is 'Why has this worked up until this point?' or 'Why is this mindset so widespread in dating?', this is the answer. And, you will have to do something out of the ordinary to resolve this situation. So, what do you do to resolve this situation? Take a step out of sexual-relationships for a bit and focus on seeking out people you can actually connect with. If you have an avoidant attachment-style, focus on healing that. Focus on being vulnerable with these people with whom you don't have any important transactions going on. When you do this, you may see the ways in which you're being inauthentic in your life and this may give you an existential-crisis. Because you would have been wrong about who you are up until this point. Even if you were right, now, you're changing and this will call for big changes in your life. So, the next step would be to focus on finding yourself, redefining your values in life and behaving authentically in your life, embodying authenticity. This will radically change your life. Then, when you self-actualize (or when you get back on track towards self-actualization), the next step would be to reassess your understanding of relationships and to learn about relationships. This, potentially, could be doing inner-child work, trauma-resolution, learning about emotions, changing your conditioning about relationships, rewriting your life-story into something more realistic (as opposed to what you're conditioned to believe about yourself), understanding psychology and figuring out how to have realistic expectations from people, figuring out your unmet needs in relationships, changing your vision in relationships, redefining 'the right person' for yourself and coming up with a different dating-strategy to find this 'right person'. Then, finally, the next step is to embark on the journey of 'getting ready' for this relationship, where you align your life towards creating this new lifestyle with this person (or people, depending on your vision). It is in this process of 'getting ready' to actualize your vision, in which you will find the 'meaning' in dating-activities, or the 'point' of dating-activities.

First of all, good job making it! 400-600 bucks a day is pretty decent money. Are your bills getting paid? I'm assuming they are, you're not falling short of money. (Especially if your perceived issue is that you're unthankful and that you're obsessed with making back lost money, just because you have an ego.) Now, what's happened with you is that you lost some money and your ego got hurt as a result of it. You thought you were right, when you were wrong. Nothing wrong with having this ego, it's natural and normal. My first question to you is - did you learn from your mistake? Or will you repeat the mistake? If you haven't learned from your mistake, it's important that you learn from it. Or else you will repeat it and lose more money this time. It's normal to have negative feelings towards a game you lost. Business and investing are no different. If you lose money, you will feel bad about it. It sucks. Just learn from your mistake and move on. And, 400-600 bucks a day is decent money. But, if you're resentful about losing money and you want to make it back, this tells me that you want more. So, learn from your mistake and get over this hump.

It is good to see people starting to use their brains in the way they date. It starts to restore your faith in humanity, for sure.

boy^2+girl^2=1. I just have to stay true to my troll-face character sometimes!

Yupp. Don't be loving and compassionate towards yourself, be hateful and angry with yourself. That's how you 'work on yourself' and 'fix yourself'. Yupp. All marketing is low-consciousness, there is no way to do marketing in a high-consciousness way. Yupp. Being nice and loving is not how you make a woman feel safe, it's being an asshole. That's who will give the 'protective, caring space-holder'. Lol. All of the posts I responded to here, have something in common. They lack faith in humanity, that it is possible for humanity to survive in a more conscious form than it currently does. That, just because things have worked a certain way in the past, that they will never change in the future, because 'human nature is inherently brutal'. I urge you to have some more faith in humanity and to entertain the possibility that it is possible for a man and a woman to be loving towards each other and make a good relationship work.

Actually, I'm asking you to disprove the positive. Just give a counter-example to the positive, that'll suffice. Which things?