The Renaissance Man

Congrats! Hopefully the organic growth keeps going

@Ryan M Leo's 4-part series called "conscious politics" on youtube.

Keep in mind Spiral Dynamics when applied to the individual can become very imprecise. The 9 stages of ego development are much better. Plus, moral development is not exactly the same as cognitive development, which is not the same as other lines of development. What does this mean? It means that even though there are correlations, it's possible to be smart yet self-deceived, to act with compassion yet be totally closed-minded, and so on. This creates so much confusion. So if Trump were to read Spiral Dynamics tomorrow he'd become stage Yellow? Obviously not. The key way to understand Rudyard's mind is to evaluate his level of sense-making, ego development, vertical development. The structure of his cognition, not the content. I mean, there's plenty of people parroting spiritual teachings, that are as dumb as a brick, misunderstanding them completely, misapplying them, distorting them to justify their lies. Clear evidence that being open to spirituality alone means nothing. It's just content. So, if his structure is one unaware of his own biases, distortions, justifications, that puts him in the conventional stages. Can be very sophisticated, smart, knowledgeable, but that's all content, that's all horizontal development. The conventional stages are prey to self-deception. That's what defines them from post-conventional (pluralist, strategist, construct-aware).

Not directly! Tate "showed the way" to misogyny! Incels by themselves tend to remain clueless and desperate. It's too much for them to figure out by themselves how to become attractive after all those years of having different beliefs. So they either: Remain incels for life Desperately seek solutions elsewhere, adopting anything that makes them improve the hopeless situation (even just the mental side) Tate, and some toxic aspects of pickup, can lead to misogyny (point 2). For the full reasoning behind why misogyny is convenient and so easy to adopt from their perspective, my post just above explains my opinion. Not all nice guys become misogynysts. I disagree. Here I do agree with Leo instead. Your typical incel is needy, shy, and awkward around women. Your typical "misogynist", or "asshole", doesn't give a shit. And confidence and being an asshole gets you laid 100x compared to neediness. Not all nice guys become misogynysts, not all confident guys are misogynysts. But we're talking about two kinds of misogynysts, we need to make a distinction here: The Tate kind, who is stage red, confident, manipulative, narcissistic, but still confident! The incel kind, who becomes misogynyst after years of being a desperate nice guy with zero success, after hearing convenient Tate-like philosophies. Will many (maybe most) women reject a narcissist? Possibly. But with incels we're talking zero success. Awkward, shy little boys no girl ever felt attracted to. And I argue they are like that because they have low self-esteem, aka they consider women goddesses, as I said again in my post just above. And this philosophy revenge-swings back from veneration to resentment. Conclusion: Incel-misogynists are born as nice guys, suffer because their neediness repels women, and adopt convenient toxic ideologies. Natural-born, stage-red misogynists are much more confident and less awkward, although toxic, and so still get laid much more. The first is developed as a desperate coping mechanism (and can be transcended much more quickly), the second comes from an actual lack of development and empathy. Or at least, this is my opinion and personal experience going through something very similar.

Misogyny is a belief that can have multiple causes. I'm quite sure the reason Tate is a misogynist is not the same as the one of his followers. Tate is stage red, immature, manipulative. Misogyny is very convenient for him, because treating women respectfully would imply a whole lot of sacrifices from his current lifestyle. His followers on the other hand are mostly incels and very socially awkward. This is the root reason they're anxious around women in real life, while still being misogynists. The hatred is born as a nice and convenient justification for their own lack of success. They won't say they hate women by the way. They'll say they hate feminism, wokeism, etc etc, while a "traditional woman" (who would conveniently almost be a slave) is good. A self-deception fest! At the same time Tate's followers can't find a woman because their lack of social skills is still there, obviously. And I also find another reason: a sense of revenge. Many of those guys (maybe even most of them) are also swinging to the opposite extreme after 15-20 years of considering women superior goddesses compared to them. Regardless of the reason they had this belief, they had it, and it caused lots of suffering in a very important phase of their lives, as it made them needy, ball-less, and women-repellant. This goes full circle too, likely being the root of the social anxiety in the first place. So there's this sense of revenge as well, that coupled with the lack of success (and subsequent lots of suffering), convenient demonization, results in this rise in misogyny.

@MarkKol I mean I don't see the problem then. Sure, it's not top quality advice, but if it resonates and it makes you a better person, what's the problem? The critiques Tate gets are about the mysoginy and the low quality courses he offers. As long as you're able to be critical and not fall for that, it's all good IMO. No need to beat yourself down. And if the teachings are toxic, drop them and outgrow them when they stop resonating.

Bottom of the page

You don't need to do calisthenics by the way. Any solution of resistance training that gets you to the gym 3-4x week and makes you train HARD and consistently (strength training helps because you have objectives to reach) will work. It's simple: stimulus -> adaptation. Really that easy. People find excuses before they ever apply enough stimulus to cause adaptations, and wonder why the results don't come. Crossfit, calisthenics, powerlifting, weightlifting, bodybuilding, hybrid training, powerbuilding, a personal merger of them, a personal selection of them, etc etc etc Good luck on your journey!

Dan Koe said it really well: solve your own problems, then sell the solution. Solving your own problems gives you special competences that the market needs, and there you go. A degree is not needed unless you need to be a surgeon, a civic engineer, or whatever. But if you're currently searching for a job, solar sales may be great. You can always evolve from there in 1, 5, 15 years. Really, nobody ever said you have to start off with your life purpose. It's often just unrealistic and naive to think that way. It should be an objective to live off that, in the long run, for the most fulfilling life. Right now you could clean toilets, and it could make sense in the grand scheme of things. On the other hand: What's the alternative? If you don't care about doing your life purpose enough, then it's alright to do something else. But the idea of a life purpose is about ambition, not settling. Think you can create a successful business/life purpose without this? Not in theory, in hard, raw practice? It's very unlikely.

@Something Funny I did calisthenics, but I trained for strength, not for muscle size. But muscle will come automatically as a result of that. The programs I followed were pretty mediocre as well, nothing specific. Training hard was made easier by the fact that I loved the sport and seeing results. I could never do bodybuilding, I find it too boring.

@MarkKol Their ideas are about women/dating and business/mindset. Do you resonate with both or just the mindset part?

Yes, just train hard. It's true that doing bulking and cutting cycles as Leo said is optimal, but it's not required at all to get to intermediate levels. There are studies showing how beginners can literally build muscle and lose fat at the same time. The more advanced you are though, and the harder this is. But once you get there you'll decide what to do. TRAIN HARD! Possible objections: Without following a diet you can't gain muscle or lose fat. BS. False. Stimulus -> Adaptation. If you train hard, you'll get adaptations for a LONG TIME before diet becomes a problem. I built 15kg of muscle just eating to maintain my weight (I gained weight over time as I started with low bodyfat anyway). No diet. Many athletes get to top levels just through training, with shitty diets. You have to gain fat to put on muscle. False. If you put on fat you'll also gain muscle at optimal rates. But with a maintenance diet the muscle gain rate will just be a bit slower. As I said, I put on 15kg of muscle without ever bulking or cutting. 15kg is a complete transformation of your body. Even 3kg is noticeable. Lifetime drug free, just training hard. Here's your hierarchy of concerns. No sense to go to the next level if you're not willing to do the previous ones. Go to the gym Train hard Train harder Train harder! Refine diet Need to get the priorities of muscle building straight here. Not every tool has the same influence.

Life Purpose Course is about this specifically. Or more broadly the idea of a life purpose: making a living through bringing unique, massive value. Win-win situation.

I agree with you on this one, the first sentence captures the mechanism quite well

@Raze Some used to be and are still for sale.