SwiftQuill

@Hojo Are you saying karma is a psychological phenomenon? Or do you mean it's a metaphysical phenomenon like in Hinduism? If it's psychological, then Trump will never receive karma. I saw him in the Dr Phil interview saying "I never worry about things that bother me because I try not to think about it and I'm always busy with something else". He's not the type of person who feels worry, or regret, or guilt, or any of those normal things. I suppose that's a benefit to being a malignant narcissist. If anything his only negative emotion is anger. I do sometimes wonder if the Hindu version of karma could exist. It would explain some things. The idea that you pay in this life for the sins of your past life, it's quite retarded, morally, but it would make sense as to why certain people experience a lot of injustices in this life. Undeserving of them. Maybe Trump accumulated a lot of good karma in a past life and he's foolishly wasting it all in this one.

No such thing as karma. Reality doesn't care about morality. It's completely amoral and there's no such reward or punishment mechanism. Where is Putin's karma? Where is Kim Jong Uns karma? Their karma is to live comfortable lives full of power and essentially 0 retribution. If karma were a thing society would look very different.

Woke pseudoscientific ideological dogmatic scientifically illiterate hasn't ever read Thomas Kuhn or done any research virtue signaling scientism. We're way past the "a bit too biased to the left" and we've reached full on woke psyop. You see, I'm like the Thanos of this forum. I'm here to establish balance (in the discourse). And like Thanos, I'm an unappreciated hero.

I'm very much against materialism. Honestly I wouldn't even know what to do with 1M, much less 1B. I would probably buy a slightly bigger house, closer to the city. I would start traveling, a couple of times a year. And I would buy decent clothes, and a moderate car. Lastly I would pay big cash to publish my novels. I'm the least greedy, least materialistic person I know in this regard.

I own a blog and I love it. It's very useful to organize my thoughts, to vent, and write down life goals. But as a source of income I think you should try like 50 other ideas first. There simply aren't many people out there who read blogs. And it's a hyper saturated market. I think even becoming a youtuber is easier than becoming a blogger.

Also in my opinion people's negative reaction to "the evil red pill" is way exaggerated. I've met very few guys who were Andrew Tate fans. And even those guys, if you met them you'd consider them soy boys. They're not the type of guys who bully other men or to harass women. They just put on Andrew Tate audios while they work out. And people act as thou there's this surge of hyper masculine out there in the streets and bars when that's not the case. At least where I'm from 99% of guys are nice. If they struggle with anything, it's with lack of self confidence or social skills. This woke attitude of "we need to destroy the red pill!" Is so blown out of proportion. JP fans, Tate fans, doesn't matter. You need to really, really go out of your way to fight against the real toxic males. And if anyone talks about masculinity in society, you get a free pass to accuse them of being "red pill". This is such a nothing burger. The "manosphere" is a thing that seems like a horrible dangerous boogie man but in reality it's not. Those toxic guys constitute about 1% of men. And if women are attracted to such types of men, they should probably shut up and not complain about it.

@AION I get what you're saying but I don't think all psychologists treat ASD as a disorder. Yes I know the "D" stands for disorder. But many psychologists do have a nuanced, non pathological interpretation of it. My psych sometimes says I have autistic traits, sometimes says I'm on the spectrum. But she has told me many times there's nothing wrong with that. It's a condition, a set of traits, but she doesn't approach it as an illness. She treats this as a neutral condition, like "introversion" or "openness to experience". It has good sides and drawbacks. I think ASD as a diagnosis can be useful for you to understand yourself better. For me at least it provides a good lens to explain my personality, behaviors, and social challenges. ASD, if anything, can be perhaps too broad of a category. Too much empathy can be a symptom. Lack of empathy can be a symptom. Too much focus can be a symptom. Lack of focus can be a symptom. I think really the only common pattern in ASD is difficulty in social integration. Anyway I suggest not to care too much about the label of autism. You can accept it, and use it as a tool to study yourself. Or you can reject it. For many people who have high functioning autism or very moderate traits, it can be difficult to distinguish between a character flaw and a part of the "condition". If you think the diagnosis doesn't serve you personal development strategy then ignore it.

Accurate and based AF. Women love to demonize the red pill retards and leave all the confused and frustrated men out of discussion. "I struggle to get a gf" "Don't care. But whatever you do DON'T become red pill!" So even though no one in this thread has advocated for red pill hyper masculine BS it's still being debated. Any time anyone dares to criticism the blue pill fake male feminist ideal, they are accused of being a hyper masculine toxic masculine Andrew Tate type. It shocks me how this is always what happens in discussions on this topic.

Next week on Jubilee: Antiwoke giraffe vs 20 Wokies

When women opine on the topic of masculinity, toxic masculinity, "nice guys", bad guys, and all of that, it's pure hypocrisy. Pure delusion. I don't go out there making entire videos opining on what it means to be gay. Or what it means to be a woman. I don't know what it feels to be a woman, I don't understand their hardships, and I don't pretend I do. So when women come to men giving advice on "how to be a healthy male" and all of that, it comes from 0 personal experience, and 0 empathy. 0 ability to put yourself in the other's shoes. It's something that annoys me. It's the equivalent of an HR manager opining on the current job market and how hard it is to get a job. Who cares? If you've been working as an HR manager for 20 years, you might have selected many CV's and profiles yourself, but you're not out there in the field. Your opinion matters bullshit. It's easy to opine from a position of selection and judgement. But it's hard to opine from a position of hardship, struggle. That same HR manager who criticises gen z for not working, that bitch Karen, she wouldn't understand what it's like to send 1000 CV's in a month, and receive 0 responses in total. Her opinion as an HR manager bears about 0 significance on the topic of how to thrive in the job market. Replace the words "job market" with "dating market" or "society" and you get my point. Why don't I make a 20 minute long video on "How to be a healthy woman"? I'm sure no one will call me a misogynist and hypocrite for doing that.

I'm obsessed with stage red vibes lately

Relatable af. Because this is the way they operate: "Gender equality" = exclusion of any form of masculinity "LGBTQ inclusion" = hatred of straight people "Safe space" = freedom to say anything you want within their religion, but outside it, anything remotely politically incorrect deserves 1984 censorship I will say, stage Green people are masters of marketing. That's what creates so much frustration and confusion when talking about them. Like when they say "we support trans rights" what they really mean is "we support males to beat the crap out of women in their sports". Really, really effective marketing. Their usage of words such as "inclusivity", "equality", "tolerance", "X rights" is their biggest weapon.

I've done a lot of research on this topic so here are my main conclusions (predictions). 1. Blue collar jobs will not be replaced (nowhere in the near or medium long term) AI has been advancing, yes, and there have been advancements in robotics. But blue collar skills like construction, plumbing, eletricity, skills like these are nowhere near close to being replaced by robots. In order for that to happen, you first need robots that can even walk properly (which yes has advanced in this area). But still these skills have never been properly trained into a robot, and I've not seen advancements significant in this area. I would say these types of jobs will be 100% AI and robot safe for the next 100 years. These skills may not be too demanding "intellectually" but they require a mix of knowledge and physical precision. Mechanic Construction worker Electrician Farmer Warehouse worker Welder 2. Repetitive, easy, office jobs will be affected the most Secretary, data typer, customer service, jobs that require you to respond to emails, or to read physical files and input their data into the computer, these relax, easy office jobs, yeah they will be 100% replaced. The easier the job is, and the less of a skill it requires, the more easily it will be replaced. 3. Junior positions in the tech industry Junior software developer, junior project manager, junior data analyst, junior cybersec specialist, these are currently being harmed both by a saturated market, and by AI tools that can very quickly do your job. So yeah. I've also heard even mid level positions are being threatened, and that AI is now coding faster than most humans. But it also makes mistakes, and it requires some overseeing. As a mid level software engineer, I am concerned. But at the same time I still have skills in high demand. So really it's going to get rough, but not going to destroy the IT market. Zuckerberg saying "there will be no more programmers" and Jeff Bezos, I do think they were way exaggerating. 4. Finance, Accounting, Marketing, and other Business roles are in danger According to my research, the purpose of many of these roles is increasingly becoming automated. This is because what 1 accountant would do in the span of 8 hours (analysing finance records and various documents and Excel spreadsheets) AI can now do way faster. Same issue with Marketing positions, which involve Market research and data analysis. But in my opinion, I still think these tasks require a lot of supervision and human agency. It requires a human to go to a meeting, discuss business goals, KPI's, all of that stuff. Stuff that you can't just put Karen from HR to delegate to an AI. You need an actual human specialist in these fields. So it's hard to guess how this will go. 5. High skill and personal jobs won't be replaced Caretaker, doctor, laywer, psychologist, operations director, logistics operator, judge, correctional officer, these jobs will in no way be affected by AI or robots. Do you think anyone is going to hire an AI instead of a real psychologist? Or a caretaker? People want and need a human touch sometimes. And as for other jobs, they are so serious, so critical in decision making, that I don't see humans delegating their tasks to AI anywhere in our lifetimes. Can you imagine an AI as a court judge? Not gonna happen. For that to even become a reality, we would need an advanced enough AI to make such decisions, and then legislation would need to be passed. Lawyer? Imagine hiring an AI instead of a real lawyer for your case. I'm not saying AI won't affect these professions whatsoever, I'm saying they are at really low risk of being replaced, even partially. But again repetitive tasks like a Court Scribe? Yeah those guys are done for. If your profession is just hearing people talk and typing their words, your career is 100% in danger.

I've decided I want to become an entrepreneur. So I've been using ChatGPT for market sudies. Here's the prompt I've been using: Then I would list some business ideas (e.g. Freelance coding, buying and selling used computers, dropshipping). And then I would list my strengths and skills (e.g. backend development, creativity, creative writing, web design, project management). And then I would ask ChatGPT to list me the top 3 business ideas with the highest probability of success. This shit is insanely useful for market research.

Abhorrent.

"women don't like men who whine about their problems online" Translation: Shut the fuck up don't talk about your issues. And if you do talk about your issues, politely, eloquently, I'm allowed to dismiss you and gaslight you about them. Give me a fucking break

Most BS response I've ever received in this entire forum. And trust me I've received a lot. You don't get how people turn into guys like me. You don't get it. You think I've always acted this way and communicated this way? I've bent over backwards so many times. I've written intelligent, coherent arguments for my positions. I've been open minded. I've steelmanned people's positions. What I learned? People don't give 2 shits about your "style". They only care if you agree with them or not. If I made a really obnoxous unintelligent post insulting all Trump supporters as retards, you would all hop aboard on that train. But if I dare make a coherent post discussing the dynamics of men x women in society and in dating and in general, the default NPC feminist response is "nuh uh Tate bad women good". So no I absolutely don't buy the "Oh don't you see how edgy and toxic you are? No wonder you're an incel" like seriously you must lack basic empathy skills and basic mind theory skills if you think that's how it works. It's obnoxious. I can't discuss these topics almost anywhere. On reddit, on r/vent and r/loneliness and all of those vent subreddits, all of them censor you for it. And on most mental health support groups they don't allow it. And any group that exists for men to discuss their issues is always "manosphere" no matter if it's actually quite healthy.

Also it doesn't help that every single time, EVERY SINGLE TIME men try to discuss these topics and seek help they are dismissed as manosphere and alt right and far right and red pill and incels. You're a male? You have issues? Shut the fuck up.

When any man ever has any issue in any area of his life: "Life is hard, you have personal agency. The only thing you can control are your actions" When any woman ever has any issue in any area of her life: "because patriarchy so let's destroy the patriarchy and restructure society around you"

Exactly my view. Blackpill as a whole is problematic. But there are important truths in it. It's true that women are hypergamous, care about height, care about status, and care about looks. These things aren't debatable, they have been demonstrated scientifically. "Just be confident bro" doesn't work. In my opinion the rise of incels and rise of toxic males isn't because of Tates of this world. It's because of liberal retards who promote the bluepill ideology. Bluepill is neither true nor useful. So a lot of men get frustrated and need answers. Even if they aren't the best answers they find partial truths in blackpill and red pill. Blackpill is way too pessimistic (it's all about looks man/it's all about money man/it's impossible for a sub 8/10). And redpill is way too optimistic and also somewhat toxic. But bluepill is 100% wrong so it's no wonder men are disillusioned.

I highly recommend this playlist to those who like listening to college lectures on YT. Really high quality, informative and even somewhat entertaining lectures on Intro to Psych. Do you guys know of similar playlists on other subjects? I'm particularly interested in anything related to art and literature. What's a shame is many lectures on YT have bad audio recording which ruins the experience. And some professors are too boring.

@Puer Aeternus I only got into this topic very recently. The only Greek tragedy I read about is Oedipus Rex. I read the summary of it, but I'll read or listen to the full version of it soon. I can't tell you anything about the story because it's one of those that has plot twists so it would ruin the experience. Or maybe I'll watch one of the reenactments on YT.

This one is my favorite

Accurate and based af.

@Puer Aeternus yes theater plays. Greek plays were both a form of entertainment and spirituality. To them it wasn't equivalent to us going to the movies. Each play, each story had a lesson. These lessons revolved around harsh moral truths, and lessons about punishment, regret, and suffering. They were called "tragedies" because they had either bad or bittersweet endings. This is because the purpose was to reflect the harshness of life. A "comedy" on the other hand was a story with a good ending (not necessarily about humor). The plots in some of these plays were beautiful, in terms of literature. I recently read one which had an interesting plot twist. These plays were also often about Greek mythology. So the stories weren't always original. Imagine if each time you went to see a movie in the theater, 90% of the time the movie was about one of the stories from the bible? That's their concept of Greek plays. They were related to their religion. Fascinating stuff. In terms of history, spirituality, and literature. But of course the lessons were also super harsh, stage blue levels of cruelty. I was a bit disgusted with how morbid the last play I read ended lol.