Natasha Tori Maru

@Eskilon I think your definition can be coherent because: So, if this is how you frame authenticity - it is sound to me. Metaphysical authenticity. My approach was more broad but definitely more psychological. If you use another definition of self - ie the small self - that arises chiefly within the social domain, one's definition may differ. Suddenly you operate from a set of values and incentive structures that you use to define yourself - these pieces act to shape authenticity, which can loop directly back into integrity (I might call this relational authenticity if I want to get really nuanced). I am hedging toward authenticity being domain specific. This feels like a stronger model than authenticity being a single global trait. The dyad @aurum and I engaged in elaborated on this. I think it is a larger and more complex idea than initial inspection might reveal.

@BlessedLion interesting points regarding sexual signalling and dress. When I'm looking for a long-term partner, I want to maximise the quality of information I get about a man's interest, not just maximise the amount of male attention I receive. And while dressing in a standard provocative manner risks attracting a man who might overly value me for my appearance, it isn't a guarantee he doesn't also value other aspects. This is where courtship becomes a second phase of filtering for me. I think presentation can be used as an initial screening strategy without treating it as a definitive character test. This is also why I am not totally averse to being cold approached. The interaction after is just another level of filter.

@Monster Energy cest la vie

I mean, applies to me as well ☺️ That's on you. You either choose to accept or not.

It's not about me, though. I am sorry if what I said caused offense. But you need to do better.

Dude. Stop making nasty character judgements.

@Monster Energy you sound paradigm locked. Enjoy

Hard agree. I would argue it's almost necessary prior to discovering the environmentally safe stuff. Usually the healthy fuel discovery is a serendipitous thing while engaging in toxic fuel consumption - tangential discussion though 🤐

@Joshe you sound like you aren't afflicted with the "should" syndrome in general, though. Most people love that toxic fuel ⛽

This is changing the category of the claim. Not what I was saying.

I think @Xonas Pitfall nailed it. Did you truly not know what a falsifiable model was? Or did you want someone's personal definition?

@Xonas Pitfall it is a self-sealing, unfalsifiable model. Whenever something feels off in the logic, the conclusion is usually embedded in the premise, or there is no way to falsify. Those types of arguements usually sound coherent on the surface.

If the typical laypersons definition/conception of authenticity is interpreted through some epistemic framework, is there actually a framework-independent authenticity (am I always smuggling in assumptions)? Is authenticity always a subjective concept between a person and whatever idea they have of themselves, or take themselves to be?

Absolutely. The term can be Frankenstein'd into whatever we may want to serve a frame. And it often is! Authenticity is framework-neutral at the abstract level (or I want my definition to be closest to it), but any ideology can sort of... Pollute or (maybe colonize it) in a way that serves its own assumptions. But authenticity has a legitimate distinct concept within each framework. I think it starts to reveal a philosophical issue; the disagreement is about what counts as the deeper self. I was thinking through how ideologies grab onto the concept. Red Pill could be "stop suppressing your biological/sexual nature to satisfy social expectations". Feminism could be "Stop suppressing yourself to satisfy patriarchal gender expectations". Individualism "Live according to your own chosen values rather than collective expectations". And even Spirituality "Stop identifying with constructed ego/personality and discover what you fundamentally are". I could go on... I could go into gender roles with it. I think in any case I will never be able to hear the word "authenticity" being used without asking "Authentic to what? And according to who's epistemology? "

@Rishabh R yes 🙏🏻 I think authenticity is a function of maturity and knowing thyself (but not limited to these things!). We can persue sex thinking it is our top value - and claim it is authentic. But when deconstructed we might realise we didn't want sex after all. It was a deception. And we acted out of authenticity as a result, unknowingly and unconsciously. This is where feeling and emotional intelligence come in. Sometimes we can intellectuallize a value, but the feeling tells us something isn't right.

I can see why you put so much emphasis on that topic. I see "authenticity", just be "authentic" etc thrown around commonly in dating and romance advice. But I feel like very little care has gone into explaining what is meant. And from my dialogues with others on this topic, overlap in definitions presents as a rarity. I didn't even really think about how the concept could be filtered through gender roles - which people would commonly load up the term with.

The impulse to express myself in the way I did dissolved naturally after I recognised the boundary I had crossed with my own value system. I didn't feel that "building up inside" of frustrated pressure and a need to express it - the pressure just wasn't there. Instead of trying to hold the lid shut to stop pressure release, I put the fire out from under the pot (crude metaphor, but it seems to describe how I felt the congruence) In the face of truly understanding how I was compromising a connection the expression of my behaviour changed. And I didn't feel it like it was a censure of myself or me inhibiting. It just felt like a drive toward connection. I feel like my overall definition (which is a work in progress) lacks the essence of spontaneity that comes with authenticity. I am fundamentally unresolved here!

Agree - can I ask - does your book touch on this topic much?

I went with this initially - but then I recalled when I felt some of my actions did not align with my values, despite the expression feeling "good" (or maybe cathartic) at the time. An incentive to express myself in the moment run up against a value (no offending others). Lots of dissonance was felt.

Do you think it might be overrated for certain phases of relationship, like during initial dating? IE maybe the value of authenticity rises as the relationship progresses? I think the role of authenticity is a big step individually for people - how it manifests in relationship with a person is another layer of complexity. Cheers for your thoughts!

@Joshe it's the bass string instruments that do that to me, I find. Polyphonic contralto might do it as well?

But that isn't what he asked. That is your interpretation to try to validate your points. Status re-enforcement. The aura points argument is more likely to say more about the person claiming it - namely that they aren't secure in themselves. Comparison based. Inter-male dominance hierarchy stuff. It reads as low status to me from here. In addition "that CAN come across". Yes - it can - it relies on interpretation. One possible interpretation of many. Many dudes won't interpret it in the way you did. Just as insecure guys will see threat. You seem very confused and upset about this topic. Based on the rhetoric you engage in.

Killing two birds there - developing yourself and attracting some ladies at the same time I find men who engage in a passion and share it very attractive. I think this applies to many people in general.

I didn't explicitly state the working mechanisms for healthy, genuine relational connection I experience & prefer. I just chose to answer OP's question around cold approach only (how I prefer it to be done, not if I do or do not want it etc). I read @Emerald's response and agreed with the mechanics as described. I just didn't explicitly make my agreement there clear I didn't mean to appear to be hedging or anything. I felt she nailed it and I had nothing else to add. I tend toward the conclusion that the sort of women to generate instant attraction (or just deeper feelings in a rapid manner) may be responding to some sort of internal, unconscious version of love learned from childhood that may not be healthy. I suppose my non-aversion to cold approach dovetails in well with my little project of resisting Ni compression/closure we have been touching on. I definitely compress and spearhead for closure as a default. I am going the opposite way as a method of meta mind exploration - and I feel like this insane experiment might appeal to you, haha! So far it has lead me down some unusual growth paths - namely in being able to cross pollenate and merge different frameworks together. Feeling and emotional based stuff. @Olaf If your goal is a secure, long term, healthy and mature connection with a women - in my opinion this is the optimal path. Connection through third spaces (or even second, but this has inherent risk, although it is time tested!) is great method.