AION

So you are basically saying girls are prostitutes. That is what you are saying if you reduce it like that. I think SD green girls can be different. I have been out with SD green girls and they have been paying for everyting and I got to fuck for free. Your strategy only is true for third and second world countries. In which country do you live?

Although I agree with your vibe, I'm not sure about your reduction of dating to a status hierachy game.

Oink oink

You guys are nitpicking the wrong thing. I agree with Ken Wilber on this one. You guys don’t even understand basic modernity. Let stand post modernity vis-à-vis the big three: truth, goodness and beauty and how it apples to the strawberry metaphor.

That is what I meant. One must be neutral towards it. So I don't need to like strawberries to understand it (reread Leo's comment towards me) meaning I'm neutral towards it. You guys are gaslightening me and then think you are smart 🤣

Nah, Ken Wilber is very clear about this topic. Taste/preference and truth are completely different domains. You can dislike something and still fully understand it. Conflating the two is a very basic category error. You thinking you have to like something for it to be true is actually epistemologically unsound. That means you only think those things are true that you like. For example if I dislike strawberries and I'm self aware of that, and not let it infect my truth seeking, there is no problem. But thinking you have to like strawberries to understand creates blind spots and you might look unreasonably favorable at strawberries. It is the same mistake from another angle.

Just understanding what a strawberry is doesn’t make me like it. For example find somebody who dislikes strawberries and tell him everything there is to know about strawberries. It won’t change his taste.

Everybody has a bias for survival. And it is ok to know that and also ok to act upon that. So if somebody comes inside of your room and tries to rape your ass it is ok to defend yourself and act upon your bias for survival. I think you guys are conflating a lot of things.

If we use that definition, everybody has some bias including women. Because I don't see women looking at men from men's POV, they look at men from female POV too. It is not that I don't have the capacity to not look from female woman's POV. I'm way passed that. The difference is that I don't get swallowed up by the female POV and own my own POV/frame while others are swallowed up by the dominating mainstream feminist POV. And for the record, I totally subscribe to base level feminism. I just don't subscribe to female egocentrism: for example that emotions should be more important than truth.

Define bias. I think you are misinterpreting me.

Ok if you say so

You have to do what I say otherwise you are a narcissist 😭

You need to understand all of Wilber’s work and synthesize it with Ralston. I don’t get why mfs try to reinvent the wheel out there. His best work is integral psychology but to get that framework you need to read all of his books. The level of discussion on this forum won’t be able to carry that level of conversation. I’ve reached teal and far beyond. That is why most people don’t get me and they would rather bust my balls because I call people shallow.

It is the new buzz word on the forum

Ralston’s shit goes very deep into the anals of consciousness. The only way for me to get it is to upload it on Claude and contemplating it with AI like one would contemplate it if he was your private teacher. Just consuming a book or doing the exercises won’t cut it because most people will make epistemic mistakes while interpreting his writings. If you can synthesize Ralston with Wilber in your own mind you will reach insane insight and understanding. Wilber still beats Ralston though in terms of framework.

My observations are mostly balanced and on point. And I always get compliments on my POV. The only thing I need to work on is emotional and social intellgence so that I don't hurt people's emotions while saying the harsh truth.

It is not self biased. It is just emperical evidence + what I hear from other people. Most women are not interested in super nerdy talk. And if you are honest with yourself you will agree with this.

As for Emerald. She is a lovely person. And she had some hot takes which were special. Especially the Jungian angle. But she didnt´come off as a well rounded person. Especially for somebody who specialized in Jungian psychology. Ok she didn´t have any degrees in psychology but she did claim authority on the topic. That is why it was peculiar to see how she was struggling with her animus projection because she had a problematic relationship with masculine role models all of her life. She also came across as overly bossy, intellectual and masculine which was not a coincidence in my opinion. True feminine energy is different.

Being a nerd is a lifestyle, not an isolated behavior. Most of the topics on this forum dive deep into the anals of consciousness. Most women are not interested in that and they will never be interested in that. It doesn´t matter how much the forum bends over to social justice warriorism. This field is mostly a man dominated field and there are some special women who are interested in it too. As for the masculine and feminine POV, I think a healthy amount of clash is natural and healthy. It is like yin-yang dynamic. But obviously the clash should be done with mutual respect and within certain rules. Totally demonizing any kind of clash between the sexes is unhealthy and creepy. That is why incels stay incels. Because they don´t work on their anima projection. And in the same way women should work on their animus projection.

That is your opinion. In my opinion humans are shallow. I can work on my attitude but I think one should be able to say that. Otherwise this forum will become a creepy place where everybody has to agree with mother Natasha.

I didn’t meant it sexist at all. Men are shallow. Women are shallow. Humans are shallow. None of those statements are sexists. Because I was talking about women and that is why I said women. At the end saying humans are shallow can be hurtful to some people. So in that case we would have to sacrifice truth for the sake of some people’s emotions. And there are always some butt hurt people around. Nobody’s emotions should be top priority.

I think you don't show respect for free speech. So tell me Why can I say "humans are shallow" or "men are shallow" but why can't I say "women are shallow"?

Exactly that is what I said. Humans are shallow thus women are shallow too. I think it is disgusting taht @Miguel1 is trying to throw me under the bus here just because he fancies some female members here on this nerd forum. Obviously women won't be attracted to an intellectual forum. If Miguel fancies more females I think some child rearing forum might be more appropriate for him. At the end I can reframe my message but I won't refrain from telling the truth. If that causes me to be banned by some weirdo, I'm fine with that. You guys take this forum way too serious which comes off as creepy. This forum should aim at being SD Teal/Turqiouse and not be trapped in the SD green social justice swamp.

It is too deep to explain. Procreation itself is selfish. If you know you know. Catch 22.