MysterionMuffles

Nice guys are useless. Women prefer men who can be assertive and go after what they want. Unfortunately it's usually the unruly douchebags that have a lot less self consciousness to do that. It's a tricky balance, but you can definitely be nice with women without being a doormat. Be kind, but make your dominance known. Whether it's over other men in your vocational field or even that part of her that challenges you to look at yourself and your flaws.

You might enjoy my thread about this, except I don't think intelligent people are "stupid," though they are often unwise in terms of social decorum.

Watching the Superbowl and drinking beer was more of an archetype for the general pass time people engage in. It could be any sport or any other "mindless" endeavour an intelligent person would deem as not worth THEIR time, which they are absolutely right about. When FDR had an official chatroom and I used to frequent it, there was a handful of denouncing conversations regarding sports and the weather. And I'm sure if you browse the self knowledge section alone, you would find a fair share of people who express feeling isolated and in need of "more meaningful conversation." As you said there are plenty of bodybuilding forums, but that's what THEY value. To them, that's what they find meaningful: knowing the right diets and the work out regimines. For you and everyone else in this thread, and I guess the whole community, value IDEAS and so they frequent this forum. The point I've been trying to make in this entire thread is this: just like any other human interest, there are people who have more of a proclivity to gravitate toward one category over an other. IE, intelligence over physical longevity. The trouble intellectual people often face is not finding enough people who can comprehend the giant ideas they wish to talk about. This often leads to transformation ego wherein they start to see others as unworthy of their time solely because of the mismatch in interests. When in reality, your typical body builder who doesn't listen to The Joe Rogan Experience, would usually see philosophical conversation as a waste of THEIR time. When it comes down to it, we are tribal creatures. We just need people in our lives who match our values and interests. Just because we're of the intellectual kind of people, it doesn't make us any better than your typical bodybuilder or hunting enthusiast, or what have you. At the individual level, we all have different values and interests, some of which can criss cross among categories, and so to focus more on attracting like minded people, as opposed to denouncing those who don't share the same level of intellect, is how intellectual people can and should be trying to conduct their lives. TL:DR If you're a chess player, enter a chess club, not the football team. If you like both, feel free to associate with either one and feel free to expand your social circle accordingly. Otherwise, football players are not beneath you just because you would destroy them in chess. They would definitely destroy you in football, and unfortunately not in any metaphorical sense.

lmfao ok...yeah I only dropped the cliche because I'm stifling my usual habit of asking too many questions to know the details of someone's life circumstances whether they want to share or not. Usually it's just to let them express themselves, but it sounded like you didn't want to share anything specific and keep it vague so I decided to respect that. But in the end I would have said the same thing but with more specific condolensces and/or action steps in regards to your unique situation. So that's kinda why I just said what I said as a less detailed version of what I would have otherwise.

Ah ok I think I get what you mean. Higher IQ would mean making a choice to improve at any task, even unfulfilling ones like working at a warehouse pushing boxes around, and that is what would make them superior in a sense? Is that what you mean? Vs the Average Joe who will do good enough to get by without choosing any better way to go about their job or lives and so they just coast along without any significant improvement along the way.

I take it that you're in a situation that challenges your ability to grow, let alone enjoy yourself. You don't have to share the details if you don't want, but if I may drop some cliche encouragement, I'd say that whatever you're facing right now is THE challenge you need to grow in the particular ways you need to. So I hope you manage and triumph over that shit, find yourself your oasis and stear cleer of any mirages.

lol I was asking you XD I don't have much else to tell since I'm curious about what you think now. The most I can share for now is how important it is to simply FIND some worthwhile pursuit in life that you can measure the results of on a regular basis. What you measure improves. And I think that engaging in a new field of study where you're a complete noob is where you can become totally humbled and taught how to be as objective as possible in regards to your status at that said pursuit. That, to me, is a better use of time as opposed to attempting intellectual conversation with either those who are incapable, or the ones who ARE capable, but have no real interest in learning from the argument--rather making it all a condescending shit show to prove who's smarter and more enlightened.

That's a damn good question... Do the less gifted REALLY no they never had a chance from the start, though? It seems like they can fool themselves into believing enough in their abilities to give things a shot. Recently a pro wrestler named CM Punk has fought a couple times in the UFC and has gotten destroyed twice. I don't think he KNEW he never had a chance. He's definitely a capable athlete in the squared circle, but in the octagon and within his own mind, I think he's a little delusional and overshooting his ambitions. Unless of course it's the fault of upper management making him fight PPV matches instead of giving the opportunity to fight in the amateur leagues first. As for intellectuals, do they well see ability as a choice? I've seen enough intellectuals with equal if not worse overshot belief in themselves similar to CM Punk's, so I don't know. What do you think? How does ability, choice, and envy relate in your own life? How do you feel measured up against others and even your past self with how you are--I would assume--honing your abilities in something you find meaningful and engaging in your life?

AH that's what I was reaching for, thanks! Underdeveloped social skills and I guess a new one for me is unprocessed resulting in barriers. Nah you're not being lopsided, I think you expanded on my point quite well. Proper socialization and self knowledge is still very new to our species, I think, so it's tough for us to blend with each other. This goes for hyper intellectuals, Average Joes, or even people of low IQ. It's hard to find the middle ground between a philosophy loving nerd and your typical football loving beer drinker. Though it isn't impossible, I don't think. Hm...I'm not sure about the general popuation being more resentful. In my experience, it seems to be people with higher intellect who can become more resentful and less forgiving than the general populace, because within their ability to strongly argue for things, nihilism and cynicsm are very very easy things to argue for. Couple that with intellectual backing, it's no wonder a lot of intellectuals find themselves feeling isolated and unable to find partners, let alone friends. This is why I think Jordan Peterson's advice in my original post is so important. While you do want to make an impact and inform other people about what you know, you also want to take the time to relax and actually enjoy yourself. I often see intellectuals incredibly infuriated with how people shouldn't be watching the Superbowl and drinking beer when the world is going to shit, and claiming that THESE mindless drones are the ones who are ruining the world. I don't mean to fully engage in just pure self pleasure, but there's a balance to be found for intellectuals. Not sure if I can count myself as one--except for how say, I may seem like one in comparison to a lot of the people I know--but if I were tount myself as one, I would say that there's value in "meaningless" fun. Because at least football loving beer drinkers are still connecting with each other at the level they match up with each other. And sure they will argue over stats and who's the better team...but much like the intellectuals, it's important to find those who can reach your level. Not that it's higher than anyone else, rather it's just A level among several levels in which people operate.

We're all "better" than each other in too many countless realms of expertise. This can go from critical thinking to societal contributions. I'm not pointing at anyone specific, but being all red pilled and philosophical doesn't make anyone better than your Average Joe who works 9-5 providing market value. You may be better intellectually, but you could very well be living on welfare, arguing with people on the internet, and may just be right about everything you believe in, but Average Joe could be building machines that mass produce candy, food, or even other machines that actually provide value to society. Intelligence is definitely important and we do need it to advance as a species, but I think it's not the only basis to which one can derive personal value from. Obviously there's highly intelligent people out there in high powered jobs that are providing value to others by serving a bunch of needs: selling their products, providing jobs for said Average Joes, and just overall putting their intellect to use. I think the problem arises when someone gets into this cycle of being highly informed about intellectual things, but not really providing any value other than to argue with people either on the internet or with those around them, and for no reason but to stroke their own egos. When practically, they could be better off using their gifts by connecting with other equally intellectual people and CREATE things of value that also provide value in return. I've noticed this a lot in some people here who are hungry for higher levels of conversation with their family or friends and getting disappointed. It's like, again, I feel for your disappointment because I've been there, but you gotta meet people where they're at. Just as much as they can't grasp your intellect, you might very well be unable to grasp the simple joy they experience in their lives because you're too fixated on what's so wrong with the world and how no one just seems to understand because they haven't read books x, y, or z, or listen to this intellectual guy or that other intellectual guy that happens to be making a difference in YOUR life.

While I don't agree with his reasoning toward minimal and least amount of force when it comes to spanking (he eqauted it to a dog bite vs a tiny nip when a dog playfully defends its terrirtory and accidentally causes more harm than intended)--I think he made a good case for how a lot of non-violent actions taken upon children and humans in general can trigger the same pain in the brain anyway. After all the peaceful parenting stuff I've listened to from Stefan, John Bradshaw, and Dayna Martin to name a few, I still find it impossible and irreedemable to hit my children or the other children in my family. Even if me giving the cold shoulder to a misbehaving child causes stress in their brain, I think that's all I can muster sacrificing on the side of my conscience. I do hope one day Jordan Peterson does check out the studies on spanking that nearly prove how detrimental it is. (Has it been fully proven or is the evidence seemingly solid enough that it might as well be objective fact by now?).

Yeah it's a shame that not only does Jordan Peterson support spanking--even if it is with the least amount of force/last resort--and that he is very dodgy about his religion. But these are minor flaws that get well over shadowed by all the other value he has to bring to self-knowledge, egaltarianism, and overall political commentary. I've only skimmed through the titles of each Rule of Life and I am goddamn excited to have the rest of them elaborated more on (the child discipline one I only read the last few pages to see what his thoughts were on spanking). How far into it are you and what value have you gleaned from it so far?

I've been interested in Jordan Peterson's work lately and this video has struck me. Taking the red pill seems to give people, myself included, a sense of transformation ego. While I think it's important to respect your intellectual capabilities, it's even more important to respect the intellectual incapabilities of others. We talk about some really out there abstract ideas that are still foreign to the common populace, but that in no way makes us superior to them. Rest assured if you find your tribe you're good.

Hm, I didn't know the concept of personal responsibility and learning how to manage your reactions to things out of your control was sentimental. I don't follow Alexi Panos' stuff anymore, but the idea put forth in this video has been helpful ever since. lol I don't get why it's so difficult for some people in this thread to accept that. Instead the attention is towards the fact that she's a semi attractive woman in short clothing in what appears to be a hot location *gasp* must be an attention whore. We either cause or allow the bad things that happen to us, and we're responsible for how we decide to handle life's random unpleasantries. Not a difficult concept to understand, especially in a self knowledge forum, so I'm surprised by the push back this video continues to cause, especially considering I posted it such a long time ago.

The argument was that women need men who give a shit. Men who can put an effort into something as it is a sign of someone who can acquire and provide resources to a woman. They also want men who have values and moral integrity. If that's what you think the definition of a mangina is, then I'll gladly call myself a fellow mangina.