Again, from an unnamed interrogator, via PM:
- Quote :
- Quote from you on that topic:
- Satyr wrote:
- *Anxiety of being known, of someone knowing you more than you can know yourself. This is the source of anxiety I speak of when i said self-awarness exposes a mind to another source of suffering. This is what nihilism attempts to deal with.
The idea is that all individuals are incomprehensible - so unique that they cannot be categorized.
If this were true then marketing shouldn't work. Politics shouldn't be effective. Psychology is debunked.
Unlike any other organism on this planet humans - because they can speak and use language to lie - have no nature, cannot be categorized or defined by broad behaviours.
This makes them feel exposed - vulnerable, insecure.
Do you think this anxiety of being known is unbearable to moderns? So... a modern, being in a same room with a superior mind, feels very nervous in that situation.
I trace the source of the philosophical defensiveness of nihilism to the emergence of self-cosnciuosness.
The title of this forum "Know Thyself" alludes to the Delphic command.
An urging that conceals a cost for a developing benefit.
That advantages are known, but the disadvantages have not been fully explored.
In my view this self-awarness becomes a source of anxiety no other species suffers.
The ability to perceive self and other from a third-person perspective - objectivity is what it is.
The subjective exposed by objectivity.
What this means is that an individual can perceives himself in relation to the world - others - from the perceptive of an indifferent other, from the perspective of another.
This is what is disconcerting, not only because the mind is exposed to how it compares to others but more importantly because it realizes that another can see him as he is and not as he pretends to be.
Just for context, I separate the individual into a private and a public self - oftentimes the private self is unknown to the individual himself, therefore "know thyself" is an urging to know this true self: product of organ hierarchies inherited and fluctuating in the course of a lifetime.
I call it personae - or personality.
The public self is the social face, the performer, the caricature - character - an individual gradually develops, mostly forced by how others react towards him and his actions, i.e., performances, over time.
character can also be called "ego" to differentiate it from the unconscious self - lucid self.
The command" know thyself" is towards this ego.
There's more to unpack, but for now it suffices to explain how self-awarness awakens the possibility, in the mind of the individual, that another can know him more than he knows himself, and that another can see him as he is rather than how he wants to appear to be.
This is the anxiety I speak of which necessitates a defensive reaction - one of which is self-deciet.
Language becomes a method of creating a wall of semiotics to conceal the self from prying eyes, and this is what becomes a school of thinking I identify as nihilism.
As I've said nihilism is entirely linguistic.
No matter what variant, the degree of defensive nihilism determines the degree of semiotic manipulation used to obscure, confuse, conceal, to deny, to forget....to negate.
This postmodern obsession with subjectivity indicates a defensive desire to negate the perception of others, declaring that the individual is only what it claims to be - another's judgement is irrelevant.
It, often, also denies free-will because it wants to deny that its actions exposes its essence. It wants to be innocent of what its choices reveal about it, so it claims that it is not the actor but simply a conduit, a proxy of another agency.
- Quote :
- Is it the case, for modern, that he doesn't ever want to meet a person more intelligent than he is? This would mean there is unequality present, different potentials, which is unbearable to a modern that doesn't want to feel inferior.
Not only modern men, but all men throughout time.
Modernity is the age when all this came to its apex.
Again....as I've said before:
The inferior cannot know what is superior to it; whereas the superior can know the inferior to it more than it can ever know itself.
This relates to what I said before.
For example, man can know and understand a chimpanzee more than it can ever know and understand man or itself. A chimpanzee can only imitate man without understanding him.
Here knowing and understanding must be defined accurately.
Another reason to feel insecure. The idea that a superior mind can know and understand you more than you can yourself, opens up all kinds of possibilities that make the individual feel insecure and vulnerable.
Mediocre moderns seek relief in subjectivity and declaring themselves complicated, or incomprehensible, simply because they can deny self using words. Words as defences. Those that can use logos to deny, reject, dismiss, nullify are safe from all prying eyes.
Animals cannot, therefore they are not immune to human prying eyes.
- Quote :
- As you know, I tend to think that in modern times, many if not most females, "mate down".
From your objective perspective, yes.
From their subjective perspective they are adhering to current cultural norms - are sexually choosing in accordance with memetic ideals, and sperm sampling in accordance with their genetic dispositions.
Male fitness has to be adjusted to environment, which in modern times is urban, manmade and maintained. Within these environments the emasculated male, projecting hyper-masculinity to compensate, is the ideal; the effete male, projecting modern/postmodern sensitivities, ideologies, altruism, overcompensating for his genetically unfit mutation load by signalling his memetic fitness, is the ideal.
Females are pragmatic and adaptive to group dynamics, so they marry the nice guy, with the right convictions, who is reliable and emotionally supportive, but then mate and procreate with the bad boys.
Their mind/body dissonance becomes a split in personae/character - private and public face. They play the role of good wife, or strong independent woman, but then act out their true natures on the "down low", as they say.
This is why many modern females always go through a midlife crisis where they must "find themselves", having lived out a schizoid lifestyle.
They don't know which is their true self, the culturally adjusted, or the genetically contradicting of cultural norms.
- Quote :
- Do females too, feel exposed, vulnerable, insecure when encounter with a male who knows this female more than she can know herself? Is this too, for a female, unbearable?
Most definitely, but they also feel intimidated and, as I've noted, they feel attracted to such males.
For males it is far more traumatic, and so you will find males as the most passionate deniers - nihilism is a male construct.
Females intuitively know this - viscerally. they know their public, social, face is not their true self. The smart ones know it's all an act.
This is also why they secretly despise males that place them on pedestals, knowing that they do not deserve such heights, even if they will take advantage of them.
- Quote :
- I take again for example this Finnish europop song: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
"I'm looking for a guy with tight body, who trims himself and is not too bright"
Female retribution against Paternalism.
A "mimbo" is a turn-off for females.
Postmodernism has so indoctrinated the average female that she imitates male behaviours as she understands them....which isn't much.
See above, about superior/inferior knowing/understanding.
Ovum, sperm....one is expensive and finite - the other is cheap and in infinite supply. This is the difference.
What is at work here:
Sheltering.
When institutions reduce the severity of poor judgements leading to poor choices then women can remain naïve and playful, and carefree.
Mating down doesn't have severe consequences, as it would have in earlier times or in natural environments.
The myth that race, and gender, are social constructs, implies that all human disparity is socially derived - a matter of upbringing - and that with the "proper cultivation" all can be corrected, or reversed - bad genes can dominate.
Memes usurping genes.
Postmodern females - and males - are infected by this mythology - this self-serving, comforting lie.
Indoctrinated into nihilism that inverts everything. For them it's not "mating down" but still "hypergamy" where the inferior is now superior, and the once superior is now inferior. Any contradiction to this nihilistic ideal is a product of social prejudices, social racism.
All is uniform and all disparity is but a product of social engineering, so it all comes down to what feels good - hedonism. What is most comforting and comfortable; what demands less effort, less thinking, less struggle, and what is most fun, more promising of happiness...all institutionally dependent.
Irony - the institutions that shelter are also those corrupted by ideas/ideals that produce disparity, and contradict the consequences of sheltering.
I use the US as the example:
How can a population raised to believe that gender and race are social constructs explain why racial and gender disparity in performance still persists?
Must be the institutions causing it.
So, the institutions that propagated the lie are now held accountable for the lie that could not create truth. The method of preserving harmony within heterogeneous populations is exposed as being what it always was: a method, a myth, a lie.
But the mediocre masses cannot question the lie, they must accuse the liar - its not the message its the messenger.
- Quote :
- Females are looking for tight body in males, but not for males that have a certain level of intellect?
When provider/protector is taken over by the institution - masculinity is abstracted - then all that's left is appearances.
The male must appear to be a good provider/protector, even if he is not, because it doesn't really matter if he is.
Hyperbole becomes a way of signaling what is absent.
See hyper-masulinity in cRap - or how bodybuilders sacrifice functionality for displays of body types that are not functional in reality.
I once read a report that said that Schwarzenegger had to lose muscle mass to play in the movie Conan, because his bodybuilder body could not swing the sword realistically.
- Quote :
- It seems that a modern female wants to be the "smart one" in a relationship (with a man, or should we say "man"?) in this modern, nihilistic era.
Modern/Postmodern females are indoctrinated to believe in the modern myth of the strong, independent woman.
When they reach thirty, some begin to doubt the lie they were told - feeling it in their gut, seeing that males cannot live up to their socially engineered expectations. Many remain spinsters, or never have children, dedicating their time to career, i.e., marrying the only acceptable masculine entity, the institution. They then accuse males for failing them, unable to know themselves objectively and question their convictions. and the comforting, pleasing lies they bought into.
They price themselves out of the average man's budget, and then blame them for not working hard enough to earn them.
Monogamy is a factor - a remnant of paternalism.
They are now changing the definition of family to rid themselves of this last remnant of a past that has caused them to filter themselves out of the genes pools.
Modern females have priced themselves off the markets, making them desperate enough to then fall prey to any male selling them the lie they cannot let go of.
A grifter always feeds into the targets weaknesses and superstitions. So, charlatans pretend to be what these dumb women think of as ideal, which doesn't exist, except in theory.
If the process of American postmodern degeneracy continues then you will find females, in the future, having children out of wedlock and then forming "families" with other females, or "nice guys - emasculated, effete, males.
It has already begun to happen in "advanced western" societies.
- Quote :
- Stupid men are more fun and easy to be with. They are not threatening to a woman in any way. They do not see through female's divided loyalty... They think females are sweet and loyal, and they treat females gently.
She wants to be intellectually superior to man. Now of course I think that female's body doesn't ever get satisfied with a man like that.
Now, this is more like asking direct piece of life-advices, but here goes: Do you think it's necessary for men with superior mind to submit to the system, and seem duller and dumber than they are, in order to succeed?
This depends on the man's objective and his personal circumstances and his traits, determining the quantity and quality of his options.
As a general rule the ends justify the means.
Primordial Goddess of existence is Ananke - necessity.
If, in these fucked-up times, you must make compromises, then so be it.
The level of compromises a man is willing to stoop to is, like I said, dependent on his circumstances and his traits - objectively evaluated - and his self-respect, his sense of decency, based on his ideals.
Some creativity doesn't hurt.
A hunter adjusts his strategy not only to the nature of the hunted but to the environment the chase will take place.
Evaluating all three, if we include how he assesses his own skills, participate in the triangulations upon which he bases his actions in real/time.
The intelligence of the prey - in this context the female - and what bullshyte is swimming in tis mind, as well as its true essence - contradicting the bullshyte in many cases - all factors into the strategy.
Empathy, as I've defined and described it.
Sympathy/antipathy will corrupt the evaluation.
Objectivity - Empathy - leads to clarity, and clarity increases probabilities of success.
Here is the fucked up part.
The hunter must become the hunted - lose itself in the prey, to gain an understanding of it.
So, sympathy must be present without overwhelming empathy.
Playing the game means playing along with what you know is a lie.
It was always my weakness....
- Quote :
- Though, as females are good at detecting lies, can this even be done?
Yes it can....surprisingly.
- Down grade your targets.
Don't go for what is above your hunting abilities.
Males are not hypergamous.
If females want to return to primal sexual practices. then do so.
What do males outside paternalism do, or did?
They spread their seed to any female willing to accept it.
Be what they wants you to be....without buying into the pretences.
- Know that the female wants to believe in the lie she intuitively knows is untrue - wants to be swept away by magic, my irrationality.
When it's all done, she will accuse you of tricking her, or of lying to her.....that's to be expected.
She tricks and leis to herself, but must blame another.
This is like hypnosis. The hypnotized place themselves in a trance. the hypnotists simply places them in the right frame of mind, and helps them fall into a trance they want to fall into.
Some people want to be lied to...so lie to them.
- Believe in your lies. This is the most difficult part of all.
Something I could never master. My ego is too large.
But I've witnessed it in practice. The performer believes in his own performance, and this makes it believable to an audience who wants to believe.
This takes a particular kind of talent, so not all males can do this. It's called "method acting" in Hollywood. The actor loses himself in the performance. this will fool a woman's intuitive talent to detect lies.
but don't worry, when dealing with modern females who have already bought into one lie they will be more than willing to go along with a male's lies....as long as she knows, or detects, that both of you are lying and know you are lying.
The dumb ones want to live in a fairy tale, a Hollywood film scenario....and will go along with the performance as long as she can preserve her own performances integrity.
The shit, as I said, will inevitably hit the fan, down the line....but by then it will be too late.
Why do you think there are so many divorces, particularly among those who profess their undying love for each other, and cannot keep their hands off each other, and constantly repeat "I love you" to each other?
Hollywood is a propaganda factory.
Watch how love affairs unfold there among the rich and famous.
One year its all hot, passionate, like a fairy tale...a year later it's a divorce with undisclosed settlements.
I mean, sex itself is about intoxication. It is how animals are made to do what they would not normally do.
Women, especially, need this hormonal intoxication to be triggered - overwhelming their reasoning.
It's why Paternalism was necessary for the development of civilizations....otherwise manimals would be constantly intoxicated and then fighting when sobriety returned them to their senses.
Those sub-stadad males you spoke of are primal - they know nothing about all this. They simply do what needs to be done and believe in their own bullshyte.
They don't care about what will happen in the future, or about their integrity or nobility....all they care about is pussy.
They cultivate their feminine sides to read into what pussy wants - and if lies is what it wants then lies is what it gives.
- Quote :
- Females judging males according to outer features (which are connected to "inner" features), can this be done successfully? Wouldn't females see through male's fake presentation?
Modern/Postmodern memes force feminization upon males.....meaning it forces males to use feminine sexual practices, such as outer appearances, using clothes to conceal imperfections and accentuate perfections...etc.
Depending on the female's IQ self-handicapping works, e.g., sportscars, motorcycles, expensive jewelry etc.....
The male's IQ factor's in to let the female know it's all a performance, if she has the IQ to even be aware of it herself.
Females do "see through" it, and laugh at males, but they want to believe in the lie.
If she's attracted to a male physically his lies will be "cute" or "charming"...or evidence of his desire....if she's not he will be "creepy", a "fake", a "loser".
(@MarinaMedvin) 