Jirh

Let me bring my ruler first and slap it on their faces. I mean my dildo True. It was more of a way to illustrate that biology is what determines raw attraction. But you can find human-horse porn videos on the internet. It's not that outlandish lol. Bestiality is a known porn category.

Fixed. They aren't really life and death. Minimum wage is enough for survival in first-world countries. Yet social standards there are most important. That's because most people don't want to just survive. They want to win the ego game. The most danger is at celebrity class. Yet, most people want to be celebrities. How do you explain that without accepting that life and death are ignored in this context?

Not these. If these were the metrics for attraction, they would be the general population, due to natural selection. The reality is that these features are rare. They're here by luck or by mutation. The other indicators, yes. But again, they can manifest differently for different people.

Health can manifest and look differently for different people. You are not attracted to a healthy horse. Or maybe are, how can I know? 😂

Not even. Sexual preferences are just encoded in our biology. We cannot negotiate them.

@Natasha Tori Maru Why did you have to pick pain as an example? I know from experience some women are literally turned on by pain. This should put the entire framework into jeopardy. Individual preferences are the truth, not general trends.

💯🤝🏻

Yes, but not necessarily physical. It could be psychological or intellectual or even spiritual cues. It all comes down to how they make you feel.

💯 Plus, I would argue that the individual biological preferences are the objective truth and are much stronger than culture. Doesn't mean it has to manifest in public, though. Truth can be hidden. People can have secret undercovers relationships.

The best social place for survival is minimum wage. Being invisible. Away from danger. But we all know the hierarchy isn't about survival. It's about ego. Dating up is a feature of the ego. But raw attraction is not that. Raw attraction is what pulls you despite your ego. So women might marry for money or social status. But they likely will cheat with a more compatible guy, who might even be a loser. Raw attraction doesn't care about social standards.

It's tragic that you can't recognize a good woman when you see one.

Male or female, platonic or romantic, it's not easy to find a tier 2 thinker. Especially if you're already 30+ years old. Most people at that age are busy with work and daily struggles and don't have much time for deep friendships. Even if they are tier 2.

Accept her as she is. She's already more than enough. She brings peace and love into your life. These are not small things. And more importantly, these are not easy to find in a partner. She's a rare gem by today's standards. Accept the fact that she is a unique person with unique interests and not a replicate of yourself, nor does she have to be. Focus on the many pros that you listed and make your relationship about them more and about what you both share. For the intellectual loneliness, consider it something for you to work on. Find friends who share your intellectual capacity (which is extremely difficult, btw) or make your peace with it. You don't have to sacrifice a perfect partner for a potentially more perfect one. Grass always looks greener on the other side.

sorry I had to post this

–– James Reason

I don't have any answers. I'm just appreciating and enjoying the consecutive mind-fucks haha 🤯😵

This topic is so cool and mind-fucking! If you press the power button on your laptop, did you actually cause it to work? I think probably yes. I think maybe you can argue about the dog yelping, but you cannot argue against a system of our own making.

The argument is structured as: "Premise A is true, therefore conclusion B follows." But in using the word "therefore," they are demanding that you accept a necessary, non-arbitrary link between their premises and their conclusion. If causation isn't real, "therefore" becomes a meaningless word. By trying to prove that causation is fake, they are relying on the reality of causation to make their case. They cannot escape the grammar of causality, because grammar is causality encoded in language. Also, logic itself is a practical application of causation. Causation is in the DNA of logic.

Yes, that's the illusion caused by relative stability, aka the dream state.

I don't view it as teaching. More like sharing what I know and learning more in the process. I prefer to call it exploring. Well, that's way too much to explore 😅 physicality, reality, real, illuminating. Each is its own journey.

But this requires an infinitely complex and regressive system to occur. We take the infinite complexity for granted and reduce causality down to a few number of comprehensible reasons that we probably can control, for simplicity. The dog has to have an intact neural system, and gravity should work with its current settings, just to name two variables in order for the dog to feel the pain and yelp. If you do the same experiment on the moon, it will not work.

Cool. What is the nature of thoughts, though? You don't have to answer of course. I'm just enjoying the inquiry.

Maybe not placeholders, but more like hijackers of the stages. The stage is the underlying human capacity. The need for order, meaning, morality, transcendence, etc... Religion is a parasitic interpretation of that capacity. It doesn't generate stage Blue. Just like self-help doesn't generate stage Orange.

Yes, absolutely. Spirituality is necessary and encoded in our brains. No arguments there. But my point still stands that religion is a placeholder for the laws, not the source. Then, self-help and religion are both placeholders of personal laws. Not chronically related, but different, almost opposite placeholders.

I would ask Hume, though, what about the causation of causation? Did infinite complexity actually cause us to create the concept of causation? If so, then we have a clear and direct causation relationship between infinite complexity and the illusory concept of causation. It's fun contemplating this stuff, especially the mind-wrecking aspect