Being muscular = more attraction?

[BETGR164128]

@IJB063 I didn't see your first reply. Give me a moment to read it and reply. 

[IJB063]

2 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

Typical orange nonsense 

I think constant cultish holier than thou now references to a person values is nonsense

[IJB063]

4 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

First off he constructs a straw man by generalizing  and framing all those who are in disagreement of his idea that beauty is objective as people who want to simply close down discussion. 

He never says "all", he literally says instead "often" often = all, I don't think that's a "straw man" but I agree with the video, many people have ego investment in their appearance and they don't like objectivity as it hurts their precious feelings, the game that is being played that there is no objectivity is a biased ego game

[BETGR164128]

24 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

In a sense everything is seen through our own eyes, we have no other frame of reference (you can't see reality through someone elses eyes) yet in a sense, based upon our nature we piece together reality, and a good way to do is rational thought, not complete relativity, it seems like you're making a solipsistic argument, and one which anything is permissible and there is no truth. 

24 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

See, now how are you supposed to argue against the that, nothings objective our words mean nothing and there is no reality, so lets not talk about it when a truths is inconvenient, I don't understand why you're even arguing a point about human nature if you don't believe there is such a thing as human nature in the first place

I'm not arguing. For me this is an excercise in clarifying my thinking. You or others may benefit from it as much as I am. But I'm not attmempting to be right, I'm just trying to raise awareness. 

I'm not being solipsistic, Solipsism is another philosophy, I'm not making any conclusions but trying to keep an open mind, I'm well aware that even now I'm constructing a partial reality. 

24 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

The scientific process is about being objective, empiricist and self scrutinizing, as is humanly possible, through a skeptical lens facts can't just be interpreted as one wants, as there are objective standards by which we deduce the truth

That's all you can do with data, is interpret it. The data is there but it has to be filtered through a human being. Human beings are biased, even skepticism and it's grounding philosophy are philospoical constructs. It's helpful to be aware of this otherwise you will take the skepticism for granted as the absolute truth. 

 

Edited March 2, 2020 by BETGR164128

[IJB063]

2 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

I'm not arguing. For me this is an excercise in clarifying my thinking.

What is an argument if not clarification of ones thought process 

4 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

But I'm not attmempting to be right,

What else are you attempting to be, wrong?

4 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

That's all you can do with data, is interpret it. The data is there but it has to be filtered through a human being. Human beings are biased, even skepticism and it's grounding philosophy are philospoical constructs. It's helpful to be aware of this otherwise you will take the skepticism for granted as the absolute truth. 

Okay, I understand that, but its still we need these constructs to survive and to improve as a race, I'm not taking anything granted for the "absolute truth" I'm not even sure if there is such a thing

[BETGR164128]

7 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

 

9 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

 but I agree with the video, many people have ego investment in their appearance and they don't like objectivity as it hurts their precious feelings, the game that is being played that there is no objectivity is a biased ego game

20 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

 

Ok, so if you aren't willing to look at orange thinking for what it is, then why are you here? This forum might end up frustrating you if your purpose here is to defend science and rationalism

20 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

 

 

[IJB063]

You get to a point where you can't substantiate your argument, so you just bust out the 

There's no such such thing as objective truth pivot 

[Austin Actualizing]

Generally speaking, it makes a man more attractive, but it matters way less than you would think. Behavior is much more important. 

[IJB063]

1 minute ago, BETGR164128 said:

Ok, so if you aren't willing to look at orange thinking for what it is, then why are you here? This forum might end up frustrating you if your purpose here is to defend science and rationalism

I'm not just dismissing science, or reason. To look at something for "what it is" what is that if not a preconceived and presupposed notion of objective truth, arguments based upon skepticism. I'm here because I enjoy the actualised.org videos and I think a lot of the viewers that watch his stuff are intelligent and make arguments and points you don't see often elsewhere, on things like epistemology etc... 

I'm not frustrated, I'm just clarifying my thinking

[BETGR164128]

11 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

You get to a point where you can't substantiate your argument, so you just bust out the 

There's no such such thing as objective truth pivot 

If you say so. Be aware that this is a story you create in order to bring the the experience to a closure rather than being ok with not knowing 

[IJB063]

I'm not stage orange anyway, I'm fully stage red my guy, I'm a fucking

SAVAGE

[BETGR164128]

3 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

I'm not stage orange anyway, I'm fully stage red my guy, I'm a fucking

SAVAGE

Who said you are stage orange? Not me. Why label yourself and why turn an abstract conversation into something where you personally label yourself ? 

[IJB063]

4 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

bring the the experience to a closure rather than being ok with not knowing 

I'm okay with not knowing, I'm just using the powers of deduction to figure out the truth, if there is such a thing

Which is the point of actualised.org

Your doing the same thing, the difference is I can admit it 

[BETGR164128]

34 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

I think constant cultish holier than thou now references to a person values is nonsense

Good. You have your opinion, I have mine. 

[IJB063]

1 minute ago, BETGR164128 said:

Who said you are stage orange? Not me. Why label yourself and why turn an abstract conversation into something where you personally label yourself ? 

I was joking

I implied thats what you were saying, considering I'm defending science and reason, those are stage orange values

You're the one who bought labels into this discussion 

[BETGR164128]

1 minute ago, IJB063 said:

Your doing the same thing, the difference is I can admit it 

Am I? Point to where I did this. All I'm doing is pointing out areas that I have mastered for the benefit of clarifying my thinking. Maybe others will benefit from it. But there is no way I'm stating absolutes.

[IJB063]

Okay give me a minute to scroll through this thread

[BETGR164128]

4 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

I was joking

I implied thats what you were saying, considering I'm defending science and reason, those are stage orange values

You're the one who bought labels into this discussion 

I wouldn't joke if I were you lol

[BETGR164128]

5 minutes ago, IJB063 said:

I was joking

I implied thats what you were saying, considering I'm defending science and reason, those are stage orange values

You're the one who bought labels into this discussion 

It's ok to being labels into a discussion. It's probably not ok to start labelling yourself. Which you did all by yourself. I never said you were stage orange, I said if you're here to defend science and rationalism rather than being prepared to think about it's limitations then you might get frustrated here. I think labelling people with a colour is limiting and unnecessary, just play the ball rather than the person. 

[IJB063]

34 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

Human beings are biased, even skepticism and it's grounding philosophy are philospoical constructs.

34 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

It's helpful to be aware of this otherwise you will take the skepticism for granted as the absolute truth. 

3 hours ago, BETGR164128 said:

It does though. You never fallen for someone average and they just got more incredibly beautiful as you two got deeper into the relationship? 

 

Beauty is not objective at all, it's very personal 

 

1 hour ago, BETGR164128 said:

Facts can be interpreted to suit biases in order to support theories or hypothesis or whatever. Ultimately these are stories seen through a certain subjective lens, and the data collected is also seen through a subjective lens. It takes a degree of self awareness to be understanding of this.

43 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

First off he constructs a straw man by generalizing  and framing all those who are in disagreement of his idea that beauty is objective as people who want to simply close down discussion. 

He then proceeds to tell you how he sees it by dressing it up as objective facts.

1 hour ago, BETGR164128 said:

For me all those results tell us that we are conditioned to percieve some features as attractive and some as unattractive at first glance. 

So here are the quotations we you have deduced a premise through reason, do you want me to go through what the premises are and why I think you reached them, I'll only do two because this is starting to bore me

3 minutes ago, BETGR164128 said:

I wouldn't joke if I were you lol

My bad, I'll try not to do it again sir