7thLetter

Unhealthy Orange on the 9-5 Job Lifestyle: "Jobs are just modern-day slavery. You literally work pay-check to pay-check every single day from Monday to Friday, party on the weekends, on repeat. You're basically living life just looking forward to the weekends, that's a sad way to live life. You see, J.O.B stands for 'Just Over Broke.' When I was working a job, the way I thought about spending money, was how much time at work it took me to acquire what I just spent my money on. My T-shirt? I spent 8 hours of my life to get this shirt! My pants? It took me 15 hours of my life to get these pants! Now the next time I want something new, I have to spend 'X' amount of hours at work to get it! Sad part is, 90% of the population follows this type of average lifestyle, we call them '90 percenters.' They get taught to work hard in school, pay thousands of dollars for a degree, spent 'X' amount of years at school, just to live pay-check to pay-check. That's what you call a SCAM. Now if you don't want to be one of these people, you need to follow our lead, be coach-able, and learn to work with our investment vehicle to get you to where you want to be in life. You want to retire your mom who is working so hard everyday at work with all of her unfortunate medical conditions just to put food on the table? Come join us. You know there's a good saying, 'Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.' We will be the ones who teach you how to fish now come join us."

My current plan is to work at my current job, live frugally to save up and build capital, learn some investing/business skills, wait for a recession or market downturn, then potentially get a loan to start up my own business or make some investments. Any suggestions?

** I apologize in advance if I'm not educated enough for this conversation. Again, I'm Canadian, and I just became interested in American politics this year. What I know about these two is based on what I know from watching all the 2020 debates, and a handful of YouTube videos.** So we all know that the presidential candidates aren't the best this year, but Americans are left with no choice but to vote for one. In my unbiased opinion, I think the best option for America right now is Trump for another 4 years. At first though, I was hoping for Biden to win the upcoming election just because I didn't like Trump's character. There's just so much about his character that people don't like, he's a narcissist, a con-man, pathological liar, etc. So I had this mentality of "Please, anyone but Trump." Biden also worked with Obama as his VP and I liked Obama, so that's another reason why I favored Biden. Until I started to learn more about Biden. We can sit here and talk about him creeping on little girls but that's not important. A couple important points about Biden is that, I truly believe it when people say he hasn't done much in 47 years, and even in 8 years as VP. Maybe someone here could educate me on what he's done because I don't know. There's the Hunter Biden scandal going on, and apparently the Biden family is under criminal investigation right now as we speak. From what I know about this, basically Hunter has been doing some shady business with foreign countries, and Joe was involved in this taking a certain percentage of the profits. Joe denies all of this when its brought up in conversation, but whistle blower "Tony Bobulinski" confirms this. Joe Biden wants to transition into a more "Green" environment-friendly economy. Couple big plans we've heard from Joe is banning fracking, and transitioning out of the oil-industry. Which is great, but I think this comes with the cost of losing a ton of jobs, maybe also even at the cost of increased government spending. Lastly, Joe seems like he's a weak speaker, and it is said that he has dementia. How can he be fit to become president of the US? Here's my basic understanding of both parties: Democrats = Focused on Social, Environmental Issues Republicans = Focused on Economics So basically, Joe Biden will focus on certain social and environmental issues, but at the cost of the economy. Trump will focus on the economy, but at the cost of social and environmental issues. At this point, I think the US needs to focus more on the economy. The US is in a deep recession right now and social, environmental issues should be the least of everyone's concern. People might argue that the recession/bad economy right now is Trump's fault, but its because of the virus lock downs, it was inevitable. Every other country is economically suffering also because of the virus, its not just the US. People talk about Trump dividing the people, riots and looting, but in my opinion I think a big reason for all of that is because of the terrible economy everyone is suffering through. It must be the ones living in poverty who are doing the all the looting, crimes, etc. Losing your job, living in poverty, creates mental-health issues, and mental health issues are a big reason for crime. And its not even just the mental-health issues, living in poverty itself creates a desperate desire for a solution, and their solution is to commit crime. Again, the bad economy right now isn't Trump's fault. I think it would be a challenge for any president/government. In conclusion, why Trump? He's a businessman, we might not like his character but at least he gets stuff done. We might say he's either Stage Red or Orange on the Spiral, and those are the people who are practical, they take action. He's GOOD for the economy. Why not Biden? He would be more of a Stage Blue/Green president. He cares for the environment + social issues and that might be good and all for growing the collective consciousness of America, but I still think the economy is more important at this point. If Biden is elected then we could see a total collapse of the US economy, and that would bring even more social issues like extreme poverty, homelessness, increased crime rate etc. Plus if he's Blue/Green, then he's all talk no action. He would promise so many things but won't act on those promises. And that's already been proven to us, check his record. I'd love to hear what you guys have to say about my unbiased opinion. Correct me if I'm wrong about anything, let me know if my points are valid. I feel that I have a strong opinion here, but at the same time maybe I don't know what the hell I'm talking about.

Ask your dad if he can teach you

@ivory So in the integratedsociopsychology link we were just looking at, it says: "Self-Actualisation, as a way of thinking and being – ie: G-T YELLOW – can only take place, according to both Maslow and Graves, when the lower (1st Tier) needs have been met." This idea of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and Spiral Dynamics being closely related is actually quite new to me. I just wanted to point this out because its interesting and this lead me into looking more into Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. And in Maslow's Hierarchy of needs it does in fact say "Love and Belonging - Friendship, family, intimacy" is part of our lower tier needs. Just like how we need food, water, shelter, we also need friendship, sense of connection, etc. So in conclusion, I would agree with your perspective on this topic. Although Preety_India, the first to post on this thread put it in the best way, "It's not about transcending the need for friends. It's about transcending neediness." With the idea of Yellow integrating the healthy manifestations of Green, it makes sense. Although I'm sure its not just Green, Yellow is the "Spiral Wizard." It understands all lower tier stages so I'm sure it includes the healthy manifestations of all, and it is said Yellow can 'choose' to operate from the lower stages. So rather than Green being a part of Yellow, I think its more of a conscious or subconscious choice of the Yellow individual to think and behave in a similar way that Green does. Because at the end of the day, Yellow is its own stage, just like all the other stages are its own stage. These stages are completely separate and different paradigms. Although the different stages may have similar characteristics, to move onto the next stage requires a complete paradigm shift. But you need to keep in mind, to make it even more complex, individuals moving up the spiral are moving up into the next stages gradually. I don't know where this idea of Yellow integrating healthy manifestations of Green comes from, but its most likely more so the case for individuals who are partially still at Green and slowly transitioning into Yellow. I would imagine it to be less likely the case with those who are 100% Yellow. And I do make a distinction between "isolation" and "solitude." Perhaps those who argue they don't need friends actually mean solitude rather than isolation? Personally, I guess I'm part of those people who say they've "transcended" the need for friends. But even though I make that claim, I mean I crave solitude rather than "I consciously choose to isolate myself because I'm spiritually woke!"

You should just stay away from posting stuff like this on these forums. From what I've seen most here aren't educated on things like this. Its a possibility it could reach $100K but we can't say when. Let's just say within' the next 5 years.

Why not? You could always focus on the Youtube stuff later on. Make a living first, then focus on what you're most passionate about. It would be just like how most entrepreneurs start with a job first to build up some capital in order to invest in a business or other investments. I'm sure 95% of self-made millionaires started with some type of job in the very beginning. That job may or may not have been their passion, but it was a learning experience for them and it was a source of income. I'm sure you'll learn a lot through experience when re-selling. Sure it might not be a learning experience that is directly related to your passion with Youtube, but you could learn things about financial independence, entrepreneurship, money management, etc. which could be important to know about when you start your path on Youtube, and start earning some income from there. Just don't dabble into too many things. In general, as someone who wants to achieve success, there's just so many enticing lucrative business ideas out there on the internet that people try to sell us on. Don't get sucked into the marketing, and just focus on 1 or 2 things within' a 5-10 year time period.

@Hatfort I don't disagree that Trump's behavior is flawed and that it would have a negative impact on the people of the US, it certainly will and already has had some kind of impact over the past 4 years of his presidency. But Biden has his fair share of behavior that is looked down upon as well. Like I said in the start of this thread, both candidates are terrible, but if Americans had to choose one then who? I never said I believe big businesses keeping more money is good for the economy. In a previous post I said "If big businesses are doing well, then wouldn't that mean more jobs? But if the elites are corrupt and selfish, then I guess not." Seems like you're taking that and making it out to be part of my beliefs, even though I said "I guess not." Because I definitely don't think that. Although I do believe that if big businesses have more money then I assume they would be inclined to make more lucrative investments within' their company in order to make them more profits, which would then create more jobs, that's what I mean. Thousands of jobs exist today because big businesses are growing, they made profits as a small company in the beginning then they continued to re-invest that money in order to grow. This is what it means to scale a business, and any further progress from here all goes up. Don't tell me they started off with thousands of employees from the very beginning and didn't invest profits in order to create those jobs. If they don't want to make more money, grow as a business, and keep everything the way it is now just to milk profits and run away in the end, then so be it. But I doubt they have that kind of mentality, I'm sure they'd want to scale up. In my understanding, it sounds great on paper to have the government tax the rich because they can afford it, but wouldn't you agree that they possibly would just increase the cost of the goods and services that they provide in order to keep up with their previous standard of living? "Before the Biden/Harris tax plan I was making $5M/year, now I'm making half, let me increase the cost of goods to have my $5M/year back." Basically. But if regulations are put into place like you're saying, to combat the idea of businesses increasing the cost of goods/services then sure that would make sense. Whatever happens, whoever becomes president, I do believe the US will face the biggest financial crisis in history in the near future, its inevitable. Especially with the biggest debt bubble continuing to skyrocket, $27 trillion in debt, that's just insane.

@Hatfort With the idea of the corruption of greedy elites aside, I posted this thread to try and understand why Biden is a better option than Trump. With your insight, we now know that each president and each political party has some kind of hidden agenda in favor of the elites. That's great. But I'm much more interested in the comparison of what each President will do for the country while in office, to understand what kind of effects their plans they decide to implement will have on the country and understand why you favor one candidate or the other. Such as, Biden wants to raise taxes on specific individuals earning a certain amount, how does that effect the economy. Biden wants to transition out of certain industries to lean towards a "Green" future for the US, at what cost and how does this effect the economy, etc. And I want to say, I don't fully understand the ideology of what each political party holds. What I know so far about the 2020 US presidential candidates is what I assume is true about the ideology of the political party they represent. Today I learned something new. So we know that Joe Biden wants to raise taxes on those earning above $400K/year, that's great for the economy right? Wrong. All the popular multi-million dollar companies that we use on a frequent basis like grocery stores, oil companies like Chevron, fashion companies like Nike or Adidas, and any other popular business you can think of all earn above $400K/year, that means their taxes will be raised. As a result, the cost of their goods and services will increase. Everything from the cost of groceries, gas, clothing, rent, will skyrocket. The overall cost of living has gone up. With taxes being raised on big businesses, this also may have a huge impact on how affordable the cost of labor will be as well. If companies aren't able to afford their employees then mass layoffs will happen. And like you were saying, the economy needs cash flow in order to survive. If the cost of living and taxes will increase, then there won't be that redistribution of money, because its all going to taxes and the increased overall cost of living. The middle-class will be destroyed.

@ivory I also want to add something about Stage Yellow. A lot of people have this idea that Yellow can be a lone wolf, and based on other sources its just often said that it IS a lone wolf. Leo didn't create the Spiral Dynamics model, and he's not the only source to understand what Spiral Dynamics is. https://www.integratedsociopsychology.net/theory/vmemes/self-actualisationyellow/ Under Self-Actualized into YELLOW thinking, the above link says: "4. The self-actualizing person enjoys solitude and privacy. They can also seem detached. It is possible for them to remain unruffled and undisturbed by what upsets others. (YELLOW will walk away from ‘lost causes’, how ever noble they might be.) They may even appear to be asocial. This characteristic is related to a sense of security and self-sufficiency." My opinion on this is that Stage Yellow is just so complex-minded that surface-level thinkers just don't stimulate them through conversation, that Yellow could care less about engaging in an intellectual conversation with them. And how it says "Yellow will walk away from lost causes," I'm sure this means that Yellow understands these lost causes' level of psychological development so well that there's no hope for them to even do better, or that they understand it would take them a long time to even get to a certain level so they don't even bother. Do you try to explain algebra to a toddler and hope that finally they get it? Or do you understand that it takes ages for them to grow up, mature, to even understand what you're talking about? Right. Stage Yellow is rare, it is said that 1% of the population is at this stage, so wouldn't you agree that people at this stage wouldn't necessarily associate themselves with others? Not in an arrogant way, but being realistic. Just understand the fact that people tend to associate themselves with others who are closely similar to them in certain ways. Generally speaking, rich people don't associate themselves with homeless people, healthy fit people don't associate themselves with fat lazy people, you get the point. If anything, I would imagine Yellow to have other like-minded friends, so maybe they would have close friends who are also Yellow, or above. Not to say that they won't entertain friendships with those lower on the spiral, but since this stage is so rare, there's not a lot of like-minded individuals that they likely tend to lean towards being a lone wolf. Maybe this will change in the future as Yellow starts to become more common. https://projectsovereign.org/stage-yellow-spiral-dynamics/ This link above states: "Yellow is a Lone-Wolf." Under the Characteristics of Stage Yellow. Thoughts on the image below? This idea of awakening, and socially withdrawing from others is said quite often, so there must be some truth to this.

I don't watch David Dobrik, and I don't doubt he gets girls but how much of his "attraction" with girls in his vlogs are staged? A lot of the funny moments in his vlogs are staged. One time his friend intensely made out with an old lady, or his friend refused to make out with a girl who was his guy friend's ex and they had "bro code," but made out with her anyway. It's all just entertainment, they live in Hollywood. Plus we can take a look at David's current girl and past exes, impressive or not? But I'm not hating, just providing my opinion. My point though is that its so easy for others to quickly assume things about other people's lives based on what they see on the internet. No one knows how David's love life or attraction with women actually is in reality, other than him, his friends, acquaintances, and family. But of course, the whole idea of being detached with women creates attraction. Period. I don't disagree with that, it s counter-intuitive. A lot of PUAs or dating gurus teach the same idea.

@Hatfort I already admit that I don't have enough knowledge in this area, what I know is based on what little bits of knowledge I've acquired over a few months. I'm also trying to refer to spiral dynamics to try and understand both party's perspective. At the surface level, Republican/Trump = Red/Orange, Biden = Blue/Green. Like I mentioned in the thread, Biden wants to transition into an environment-friendly future for the US, which is quite a Blue/Green thing to do. And in order for his plan to play out, it would cost thousands, maybe millions of jobs and more government spending. Which is bad for the economy right? That's the basic idea I had about Joe Biden. When it comes to Trump, doesn't seem like he's too focused on an environment-friendly future, probably wants to keep it the same way and focus on other issues. Makes sense when you say Republicans are focused on the elites, but I was under the impression that, that is good for the economy. If big businesses are doing well, then wouldn't that mean more jobs? But if the elites are corrupt and selfish, then I guess not. I'm also thinking about the impact a Biden win or Trump win would have on the markets. In general, how the markets move are based on people's outlook and emotions on the future of the economy. But of course we've seen the US stock market grow like crazy over the past couple months during a recession so that's not always the case. But a lot of gurus on Youtube are saying that the Fed has been pumping money into the stock market to create an illusion that the economy is doing well, also of course to make the rich get richer. Could've possibly been a part of Trump's plan to earn himself some more votes for re-election. But despite all that, my point is though, the markets seem to favor a Trump win over a Biden win. So if that's the case then he may as well be better for the economy, overall.

@PurpleTree No idea but Reagan was decades ago. And yea its sad but true. I'm sure they've had a huge issue with homelessness for years now, it stems from an even bigger issue of mental health problems and drug use. They just have so many drugs in large amounts coming in from their next door neighbor Mexico. Plus they probably have the most garbage in their food out of all countries. All these different candies, soda pops, fast food, I'm sure are linked to a lot of diseases that most people probably have never even heard of. I was shocked as well when I lived in Hollywood for a month. There's just hundreds of homeless people sleeping all over the Hollywood walk of fame. I heard its similar in New York too. @Parththakkar12 Honestly, true. I think its time we see this thing collapse. We need to see a total reset to start all over again. The Universe will decide. Seems like Biden has a good chance of winning at this point, let's see what happens.

@Meditationdude Biden has a history of racism too does he not? And he lies at times as well. Maybe not to the extent that Trump does but he denies anything ever happened with the whole Hunter Biden story, avoids answering any questions about it as well, says he supports banning fracking then later says he opposes banning fracking, avoids questions about packing the court, etc. I'm sure there's more examples that I don't know of. @PurpleTree Even if they do care about homelessness, are they actually effective when it comes to doing something about it, or are they just all talk? @Leo Gura What do you mean @louhad All I know is that Biden wants to transition out of the oil & gas industry to create a "Clean Energy" future. That's great and all but I would imagine that to be detrimental to the US economy, in the short term at least. That's going to cost a ton of jobs, increased government spending for manufacturing & installations, potentially more tax cuts on Americans as a result of this, and "Clean Energy" could also be more expensive for daily use so bill payments will increase. @Applegarden Covid already happened, and seems like it would be hard for any President to manage. Every other country is suffering too because of this pandemic. Seems like Biden is coming from an outside perspective, looking at what Trump did so far, and is pointing the finger talking about things Trump should've done. Its like as if car crash already happened and killed 4 people, and Biden's like, "Come on man, you shouldn't have drove there. You could've saved 4 LIVES. Now an American family will sit at the dinner table tonight with 4 EMPTY SEATS." If you've read what I mentioned a couple times on this thread, he avoids questions about court packing, and the Hunter Biden story. Plus he has dementia, often forgets certain things and some of the things he says are gibberish. So.. Addresses questions asked, and acts more professionally? Sure, acts more professional than Trump at times but anyways both candidates are terrible. @Finax I know I said Biden is Blue/Green, but I actually see him as pure blue on the spiral. @eggopm3 You're Vancouver too? Nice. I don't watch TV so that must be how I've been able to avoid it. I just use my laptop & phone and I intentionally watched the debates + intentionally learned more about their politics. I'll be completely honest I don't know much about our own election/politics as much as I know US politics, lol stupid of me.

@Parththakkar12 Yes I am a noob, and I don't doubt what you're saying. But now that we know that, we're still left with the question of WHO do the Americans vote for? Who will do a better job at serving the American people? @PurpleTree It's debatable, there's lots to think about, there's a lot of pros and cons to focusing on one or the other. If you think the environment is more important, then that means you think its a good idea to have millions of jobless, homeless, Americans living in poverty running around committing crime and rioting. Just so they can have clean air, clean ocean water, maybe have some nice flowers grown in the grass. Actually I think it would be nice to have some crime going on with some clean air and flowers so all the viral videos of crime being taken place would look nicer and we could see the crime happening clearly on video without the polluted air. I'm saying the economy should be the main focus right now, because the US is currently in a deep recession. The environment should be secondary at this point. The economy is already bad right now, look what's happening. The solution to this is not to focus on the environment.

@ivory I actually hear this quite a bit, where people basically say things along the lines of "There's no right or wrong way to do Spirituality. Spirituality is right here right now. Spirituality includes all experiences of life." Okay sure, let's say every experience in life is a Spiritual one. But my argument/question to that is, so if I did heroin/meth everyday that's also a Spiritual practice? Doing heroin/meth everyday is not a "wrong" way to do Spirituality? What about the people who live an average life, those who wake up at 8AM, take the train to get to their 9-5 job, pay the bills, on repeat. Are they growing spiritually? Under the assumption that EVERY experience is a spiritual one, where do you draw the line between healthy experiences & unhealthy experiences? I'm a big believer in the idea that there's certain activities that "lower your vibration" and ones that "increase your vibration." Its pretty obvious which activities/habits lower/increase your vibration. Its basically understanding healthy & unhealthy habits. Watching TV, lowers your vibration. meditation, increases your vibration, and so on. So with that being said, shouldn't we stay away from the unhealthy habits and do the things that increase our vibration in order to grow spiritually? That's the "right" way to practice Spirituality right. But I'm not saying having friends is "lower vibration," of course like you mentioned in the first part of the thread, there's different types of friends that can be beneficial or non-beneficial to your life. Okay there we go. Leo says it depends on the person, just like what I was saying earlier with the different personality types. Some people are introverted, some are extroverted. I want to include @Akemrelax in this part of this post too, because he replied to what I said to you, basically saying the same thing. Talking about how isolated people feel depressed, but they won't admit it. How can you guys be so sure that the depression is linked to, and is the result of not having friends? I'll admit I don't have a clear answer to this, I think this is something that could perhaps be studied by psychologists. @Akemrelax Your post makes it seem like you feel personally attacked by the fact that I'm saying "I think its true that you can transcend a need for friends but it needs to come naturally" based on your tone. You need to akem..RELAX, hahah. I'm just saying how I personally feel, and I'm the type of person who is blunt, and who will admit all my wrongs/mistakes. No I'm not a depressed isolated dude with addictions, why does it seem like you're attacking me, you don't even know me. I GENUINELY FEEL that I don't NEED friends. I'm not isolated, I have a few close friends that I don't NEED to hang out with, but I choose to hang out with them when I want to. I live with my parents and siblings, and I have a strong urge to move out very soon. What I genuinely feel (most of the time) is that family is an illusion, and sometimes I just want to remove myself from this family, let us all forget about each other, move to another city/country and just live my own life. I will admit to you, I do feel a strong need/craving for an intimate relationship because I've never experienced one before. I'm good at making friends, but not so much at attracting the opposite sex. You say that people won't admit they're lonely, yes I admit I feel lonely because of a lack of intimate relationships, but not because a lack of friendships. Friendships don't mean much to me at this point. Most of the friends I've had don't intellectually connect with me at a level that I desire, and that can be a bit frustrating for me. Personally, I feel that the more spiritual practice I do, the more I feel the need to isolate myself or withdraw from others. When I was in a phase of constant 20-50min/per day meditation, strong urge to withdraw. When I had my last LSD trip, experienced ego death for the first time, days after the trip, another strong desire to withdraw from others, and my urge to move out of my parents place was even stronger. And because of this I actually sometimes avoid spiritual practices until later because I'm still young and I feel that I want to experience intimate relationships. If I withdraw from social situations then that won't help me attract a female. I was under the assumption that you were denying the fact that you need to sacrifice friends in order to grow spiritually so you created an entire rant. Okay so this thread comes mainly from the perspective of how a person with "Green" values would think, rather than how it is for all of us, wouldn't you say? Interesting. And I didn't say anything about cutting off friends, but I was suggesting that its something that might come naturally. Sure Yellow doesn't mean you're a lone wolf, but it also doesn't mean you have a lot of friends either, it really depends on the person. But in my opinion they can lean more towards the lone wolf side because its back to the focus of "self" rather than "other." Plus an unhealthy manifestation of Yellow is that it "can seem cold and distant, forget to connect with people (because of its enthusiasm)." Taken from: https://spiraldynamicsintegral.nl/en/yellow/ So I think that's where a lot of people get the idea that Yellow is a lone wolf. This is all it says on the site, I think it has much to do with its level of complex thinking. I personally feel that I operate under a good chunk of the Yellow value system, but mainly I'd say I'm Orange, so a lot of what I'm saying comes from my personal experience. I personally desire more complex intellectual conversations on the topics of philosophy, spirituality, & psychology, but most people don't bring that to the table so I'm quite selective with who I let into my life. This could be a Yellow thing, or it could be a personality INTP thing, I'm not sure, sometimes it can be hard to make the distinction.

When I said what you just quoted, it was meant to be more of a rhetorical question. My point is, people are claiming that spiritual growth comes with becoming more of a “hermit” right, that’s what this whole thread is about. So since we’re talking about giving priority to one thing, what I’m saying is that these people’s priority is spirituality. And from what most of us know, spiritual practices don’t require anything else other than yourself. So if working on themselves is their priority then they don’t need to allocate their time into friendships as much, or even at all. Only if they choose to. I’m sure Leo talks about this in his videos. I think he talks about it in his “Lifestyle minimalism” video, so I would suggest you check that one out. So this idea of not needing friends could be coming from Leo, I mean he talks about it himself so. And why do you think that monks decide to spend their whole lives by themselves meditating in a cave? Because they know the value of spiritual growth and how much time and work they need to put into meditation in order to reach certain levels of growth. They have no time for friends. Correct me if I’m wrong but could this thread be a denial of a harsh truth? Spirituality or success in anything comes with sacrifices. Are you someone who feels a deep need for friends? Do you feel “woke” or spiritually grown to a certain extent but feel judged by other “spiritual” people because you have friends? If anyone tells you to cut off your friends to be more spiritual then do what you want not what they want. Let it come naturally. Cutting off friends doesn’t = 10x amount of spiritual growth. I think its true that you can transcend a need for friends but it needs to come naturally. And if you’re here writing a rant on this topic then you’re maybe not there yet, which is fine.

I think it really depends on the personality type. I'm a really big fan of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, when it comes to understanding personality types, I haven't found anything else more accurate than that. Generally speaking, introverts are less social than extroverts. With that being said, its pretty common for introverts to have a few or no close friends, whereas with extroverts they love socialization so of course they generally would have a decent amount of friends. In my opinion it seems to me that introverts can enjoy socialization yes, but they have this "need" for solitude at the end of the day. With more extroverted-dominant personality types, they're the complete opposite. They seem to have a "need" for socialization, and if they spend too much time in solitude then they might start to feel mentally tired, or go insane. My whole point is, I find it more common for introverts rather than extroverts to pursue the path of "spirituality." Generally introverts naturally tend to be the ones to "look within," "question," "observe," and "understand." Whereas with extroverts they're mainly focused outwards. They're just naturally more in tune with the outer world, so things like meditation can be a challenge for them. And so if most "spiritual" people are introverts, then this idea of transcending the need for friends could just be a deeper part of their personality type that is coming into play rather than them transcending the need for friends because they're more spiritually grown or conscious. But at the same time, I can relate to this idea of transcending the need for friends. I'm an INTP on the MBTI, and I find my way of thinking to be quite complex and unique. I haven't met anyone else in person who thinks in a similar way that I do, and I've met quite a bit of people. Not to sound arrogant or anything but I find most people's way of thinking to be quite on the surface level, it just lacks depth. And this sometimes frustrates me, I just feel so different from others that it makes me super selective with who I hang out with. I have a few friends now I see once in a while but I spend most of my time alone. And I'm someone who grew up having friends outside of school, I've had a lot of great friends over the years. Although, I was usually a loner at school on lunch break in high school and in elementary. So since I'm someone who's spent a lot of time in solitude, then its just something that has become the norm, or a preference for me. This is coming from someone who has experienced both, years of solitude, and years of great close friendships. And I can honestly say that I don't feel this deep "need" for friends anymore. Old friends I had just wouldn't be able to relate with me anymore. Although this doesn't mean I'm stuck up and wouldn't talk to them because I'm too "woke" or "conscious," I still talk to people. Whenever I work at a new job, I always try to be as friendly and as social as I can with others because I enjoy it. Most of these people want to be my friend but I personally choose solitude and working on myself or personal things, rather than hanging out outside of work. Although, I do still feel a deep need for romantic relationships because that's just something that hasn't been fulfilled for me in my life. Maybe the answer to this thread all comes down to what needs have or haven't been fully met. One more thing I wanted to point out, even when it comes to financial success, its often taught that we're the average of the 5 people we hang out with. This statement comes from the idea that people can rub off on you. If you hang out with someone you don't want to be like, you'll end up picking up some of their behaviors, habits, etc. So if the you're someone on the spiritual path, and you hang out with people who don't understand it, then wouldn't that bring along a bit of a difficulty in the friendship? And sure, maybe you can hang out with other friends who are on the path but.. I find the "path" to be quite lonely. It's not like its a project that you work on with other people, but something that you do by yourself and for yourself. Plus, there's this idea of distractions. Anything that doesn't have to do with working on yourself, spending time in solitude, meditation, questioning, is a distraction to spiritual growth. And that includes hanging out with friends. Sure there's no problem with hanging out with friends, but when it comes to anything in life, in order to accelerate your growth in anything, you need to spend more time doing it right? Spent over an hour writing this hope I provided some perspective.

I won't say too much about it, but this article basically explains how all these online dating apps are carefully designed to get your money (guys mainly), how girls have the upper hand when it comes to online dating, and how psychologically unhealthy it is for both sexes to use dating apps. After reading this article, I realized that online dating is pretty much pointless for men, perhaps even for both sexes. Not saying they don't work, of course people meet through dating apps, but just read it yourself and it just makes you not want to use any dating apps at all and to meet women in person instead. For women, dating apps just gives them a false sense of what their worth is in the dating world when they see they have 100+ likes and hundreds of matches. As a result they most likely will search for the best man they can get, when in reality he probably doesn't exist. Here's the article: https://www.mediavsreality.com/mediavsreality/2018/10/30/why-online-dating-drives-men-crazy

@Recursoinominado You’re not wrong, only thing you’re wrong about is what you think this thread is about. This thread has NOTHING to do with ME, and for some reason you don’t understand that. I’m NOT complaining about anything. I told you so many times but its like talking to a brick wall.

@Recursoinominado You’re still not getting the point. You’re ASSUMING I’m complaining, you’re ASSUMING I’m stuck. You’re ASSUMING I don’t have a solution. Do you know what assumptions are? Clearly not.

@Recursoinominado I already made my points clear but its like it you didn’t read anything I said. You seem to have me all figured out, great job detective! I have you all figured out too, if someone starts a thread on how social media can be unhealthy you automatically assume they’re bitching and looking for problems. If Leo does a video on female psychology then that definitely means he’s bitching about it. And psychologists too are only interested in bitching about how human psychology works. Lol stop replying, please. Nothing you say is helpful you’re just being a jerk. I’m not looking for problems, this is a just discussion on a specific topic. There must some deeper reason why you’re getting so heated about this topic, which I don’t really care about if there is.

No, but it ties in with the fact that this whole discussion is about, which is “online dating is basically useless.” For example I list reasons why that’s the case from the article, and on top of that, the dating app algorithm is designed to put free members at a severe disadvantage in comparison to paid members. You don’t even acknowledge this in your point you just say girls choose 5% of guys with a better profile, that has nothing to do with the apps taking people’s money. Tell me what makes you think I’m bitching about it even though I said I’m not? Plus I even admit to my lack of success with online dating apps so I’m not bitching. This is just a topic for discussion, to understand the psychology behind it all. That’s what we all come to these forums for, to understand how certain things work. Plus I’m just sharing something I found valuable. You’re assuming things about me and what I’m saying through a forum post, just like what everyone else does on these forums. If you’re going to assume, based on what you’re saying I assume you STILL didn’t read the article. If you actually read it then you would understand the whole point of this thread and actually start to make some good points of your own based on what was said in the article.

@Recursoinominado I was actually searching on Google for an explanation on why women find me more attractive in person rather than online. Trying to fully understand why that's the case, then I found this article. Confirmation bias? Sure I guess, if you want to call it that. I won't deny that I struggle with online dating, its surely is difficult and it really fucks me up. Its not healthy. I consider myself to be an above average looking male, maybe a 7/10, and I rarely match with the girls that I swipe right on. I only match with females I find to be average, then I honestly don't even message them. Maybe 5-10% of the time I match with a girl I find attractive. Over 5 years of using Tinder, I've probably only matched with under 10 hot girls who were down for me but I fucked it up with bad text game. Two of them gave me a lot of chances but I just fucked it. Tinder just makes me realize I suck at talking to women over text. But I'm not here to complain, just here to understand the psychology of this question and understand how dating apps are designed. Something tells me you didn't read the article, it talks about how dating apps are designed to get your money. Read my post above, the algorithm is designed to decrease your visibility over time, making you compete with members who are willing to pay for premium services. So I'm also commenting and agreeing on that point, its not like this thread is about me complaining about how dating apps don't work.

Pretty much replying to everyone here, but a really good point that the article makes is the fact that because of how our biology works and interacts with the technology, men are at a disadvantage. Men are visual, women are interpersonal. Within' seconds a guy will decide whether or not he's attracted to a woman based on her photos and swipe right. Women on the other hand of course judge a guy based on his looks but mainly look for an attractive personality, social status, etc. With that being said, it takes quite a bit for a woman to decide to swipe right, but of course she's probably not instantly hooked yet once she matches with a guy, she wants to know what he's like over a text conversation. Another good point that the article makes is that text is weak. Texting just doesn't give the girl the full picture of what your personality is like, its literally just words on a phone screen. She can't read body language, verbal cues, eye contact, etc. which I would say helps the girl find attraction for a guy. Overall, this makes it difficult and frustrating for men to find dates with women. Again, NOT saying online dating doesn't work, people definitely meet through online dating. A good profile, good text game help men get laid and get dates there's no doubt about it. I'm just simply agreeing with the the points made about the psychology/biology of women that make it difficult for women to make a decision about a guy on online dating apps, which as a result leads to a lower chance of success for men. Please read the article guys if you haven't. Another good point I wanted to touch on about dating apps is that the algorithm is designed to make you spend money on their premium services. One thing I noticed about Tinder is that when you create a new account, you appear at the top of the list of guys shown to women in your area. As you continue to swipe and use the app, over time your visibility decreases. That's why they have "Boost" options for $3.79 or "Tinder Gold," some shit like that. As a free member you're basically being put at the bottom of the list and competing with men who create new accounts and men who pay for boosts, and girls have to keep swiping until they get through all the paid members/new accounts to get to the free members who have been on the app for a while. Kinda fucked up isn't it. If you haven't seen this, here's a good Tinder experiment video on Youtube made a while back. They created two real profiles of an attractive male and an attractive female. Guess who got the most messages and matches? You guessed it right, the female. Out of 1000 right swipes on each profile, the man had a 27% match rate while the woman had a 70% match rate. Here's the video: