Nilsi

that's not the point. the point is that now millions of mexican girls will grow up knowing that they too can achieve anything they dedicate themselves to completely, regardless of their gender.

that is pretty cool.

what makes you say that? everywhere i look, i see death and impermanence. unless you are talking about whatever eternal spiritual core there is to all of it, i don't buy it.

from now on, i'm gonna use this as a copypasta whenever carl pisses me of 😏 in all seriousness though, what's the matter with you? he was giving you constructive feedback in a very respectful way and you act like he sold your mother into slavery.

this makes me want to throw up in my mouth.

have you tried cerebrolysin? it is used to mitigate the effects of traumatic brain injury and is hailed in the nootropics community for its effects on neuroplasticity. there have also been many anecdotal accounts of it helping with addiction and issues related to neurochemistry from substance abuse.

get more clarity on clarity, huh? that’s not a game i will let myself be dragged into. lol

that might be our disagreement then, because i would rather embrace chaos than try to get rid of it. wtf 😂 now you’re spiraling.

again, as mcluhan put it so eloquently: the medium is the message. it is precisely peterson’s prophetic pathos and his gesturing towards christian theology, western philosophy, and modern psychology that gets his message across. if he were to just bluntly tell you, “individual responsibility is important,” the message would land flat on its face. your obsession with “clarity” is at the core of the “western buddhism” zizek often talks about, which also happens to be the ruling ideology in silicon valley and tech-bro circles. this leads down the road of brain-computer interfaces, where at some point we won’t even have to communicate at all, because the message is instantly transmitted to the recipient. there is the classic zizek joke, where a man and a woman who are romantically involved meet up and instead of having actual sexual intercourse, which involves a lot of psychological games and ambiguity, the man brings his pocket vagina, the woman brings her dildo, and they watch their toys having intercourse on behalf of them. that’s the vibe i’m getting from you sometimes.

you assume people come here to "communicate," which i argue is not the case. the medium is the message. and the primary message of most people here is "look how spiritual/smart/virtuous/etc. i am." whether the actual content of the communication is intelligible to others is only incidental. i would even go as far as to say that such "simulated" communication, to use baudrillard's term, is the primary characteristic of social exchange in our postmodern society in general, and that your concern with "effective communication" is largely a nostalgia for authenticity, which is a rather reactionist stance to take.

i don't know if you're arguing that this is just leisure, or that there is somehow a shared mission of "personal growth," or whatever, but i would claim it's mostly neither of those. i would assume most people's actual (probably largely unconscious) motivation for coming here is having their identity validated, because they don't have any social structures in their everyday life that value traits like "consciousness," "intellectual sophistication," "moral development," or whatever. and i also suspect that many individuals here have developed these traits to the detriment of other, more generally valued traits, so of course people will try to signal these traits as strongly as possible to reinforce their sense of self-worth, which is the primary reason why they are here in the first place. i guess your allegory of the insane asylum is actually not that far off from how to conceptualize this place, only that "insane" is, of course, a highly relativistic and loaded term. if foucault were still around to write a sequel to "discipline and punish," i'm sure he would have a lot to say about forums like reddit, 4chan, and our lovely place, as far as "neurodivergent" people being shoved to the recesses of society goes.

i agree that this was a uniquely obscure and atrociously structured argument, but i disagree with the premise that what we’re doing here falls into the category of "conversational communication in common social situations," as your "maxims of conversation" imply. if i wanted to have a "conversational communication," i would precisely seek out a "common social situation." i would step out on my terrace and have a chat with my neighbor, or meet up with my friends in a bar, not visit an online forum which mostly appeals to ubernerds.

pahaha

Alright kiddo, imagine you're in a big playroom with lots of different toys and games. Let's break this down: 1. **Intelligence is like a pretend game:** Just like how characters in your favorite storybooks aren't real people, intelligence is like something we pretend exists in a certain way, but it's not a real thing you can touch or see. 2. **Dreaming and ideas:** When you're sleepy or dreaming, you can think of all sorts of wild ideas and imagine things from different angles, just like a fun, twisty slide in the playground. 3. **Making sense of things:** We try to understand these ideas by putting them in boxes and rules, like sorting your toys into different bins. But sometimes, this doesn't capture the whole picture, just like sorting only by color misses out on which toys are your favorites. 4. **Growing and learning:** Growing smarter isn't just about counting how many things you know. It's more about understanding things deeply and using that knowledge well, like knowing not just the names of your toys but how to play with them in creative ways. 5. **Different ways to be smart:** People and animals can be smart in different ways. Monkeys might remember where their food is better than humans, and computers might solve puzzles faster, but being smart isn't just about one thing. It's like having a bunch of different superpowers. 6. **Learning together:** Sometimes, working together and sharing ideas makes us all smarter. It's like when you and your friends build a huge castle out of blocks together. But if we don't talk and share, we might miss out on cool ideas and fun games. So, being smart is like playing in a big playroom with lots of toys, ideas, and friends, and finding fun and interesting ways to learn and grow together!

i‘m a fan of music. ain’t no genre safe from me

the remix also rules

wdym lol it‘s a bop 💅

the rollout and singles of charli’s upcoming album have been excellent so far. i can already tell it’s gonna be a strong contender for album of the year for me.

i don’t perfectly fit into one of these archetypes either – the same way no individual would perfectly fit into any other typology (like mbti, for example). i’m a mix of dandy, coquette, charismatic, and star.

in sales (i sell out-of-home advertisement, just for context), for example, if i’m talking to the head of marketing of a billion-dollar-plus company, i won’t be able to “vibe” my way into closing the deal the way i could with the ceo of some sme. i need to signal competence in a much more nuanced and complex way, attuned to her specific situation. the same goes for seducing highly individuated/developed girls/guys, such as artists, philosophers, models, successful entrepreneurs, etc., which requires much more strategy than picking up some drunk basic bitch in a nightclub.

that’s a good point and i tend to agree. applied complex psychopharmacology will go a long way in creating good states for socializing. still, seduction is an art, and the more desirable/rarefied your “victim” is, the more complex your game has to be, and physiology alone won’t get you there.

it’s a useful framework for identifying your natural tendencies when it comes to seduction, not a rigorous academic typology.

orange is fundamentally about the belief that the human mind can fully comprehend and manipulate reality through reason and technology. this goes back to descartes and is perhaps best represented in the archetype of the alchemist or goethe’s faust – the individual who relentlessly organizes the material conditions of life, attempting to bring about the spiritual/transcendent. this libertarian americanism you are characterizing is only one manifestation of this attitude towards life.

robert greene‘s „the art of seduction“ provides such a list of archetypes. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Art_of_Seduction