• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jacobsrw

  • Rank
    - - -
  • Birthday 10/23/1992

Personal Information

  • Location
  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

4,114 profile views
  1. My thoughts today… A man unquestionably needs an internal fortress of tranquility and an external purpose with meaning in order to remain anchored when the storm is upon him. If he is devoid of this he becomes lost in the abyss of reality and at any moment crumbled into an oblivion. Having ruminating upon this idea while writing it, I was stunned not by only how essential this has been in my own life but also how vacant it seems to be in so many who live today. It is clear people before the age of modernity and technology were more clearly devoted to a purposeful way of living. Now since the advent of postmodernism and libertarianism it seems like it is valid to just about live any way of life, even it is corrosive to the human soul. I’d like to see more men shift in this way while still embarking the spiritual path. However, I am unsure how likely this may be. What are others thoughts?
  2. Fundamentally, this has a lot to do with age and values. I’m not sure your age but if you’re in your 20s especially below 25 you will endlessly find people are engrossed in shallow petty nonsense. This has a lot to do with lack of life experience and being far too socialised in mainstream culture. Values is key too. If your values are incompatible. E.g. you value inner work, introspection and spirituality all while they value materialism, hedonism and mainstream culture there’s never going to be a deep connection. Im now 30 and ever since dating and meeting women 28+, I’ve found they are far more emotionally mature and spiritually acquainted. I had a lovely meet last night with a 28 year old woman who I was able to share casual banter with and go deep spiritual/philosophical subjects. This is not going to happen in typical social spheres. You need to niche down and disregard those you don’t align with you from the get go.
  3. I mean it will give you a basic understanding of the human mind from a purely functional, materialistic perspective but you have to consider that psychology is now a science therefore philosophy and spirituality are secondary at best. It’s deep roots in philosophy are hardly acknowledged in our day and age. Also consider that a degree in psychology may provide some career opportunities but it’s pretty limited unless you study post graduate, honours, masters and doctorate. I studied a degree in psychology several years ago and overall it wasn’t for me. I enjoyed some aspects and don’t regret it, since I learnt a fair sum about the academic world. However, I’ve now moved into counselling which is far more aligned to philosophy, the deep workings of society and the human mind. If you’d like to learn some of the deeper ideas behind psychology study Carl Jung, James Bugental, Rollo May, Sigmund Freud, Martin Heidegger and so forth. James Bugental in particular was a psychotherapist in Existential Humanistic Therapy. Great start to some deeper knowledge of the human mind.
  4. Thanks! Yeah this was also my thought too, it could be insinuating too much. This is still one of my early experiments. I plan to embed passages, single words or quotes throughout my art more subtly in coming work. Just trying to figure out that balance. Philosophical and spiritual writing is my other passion so I need to work out how I’ll integrate the two.
  5. It’s probably more about the images implicitly conveying the ideas through their appearance. Although I would like to experiment and see what the balance would look like. Here’s an example of a recent custom digital art piece that I’m working, in progress. It’s called ‘Seeing into Myself’. Mm I haven’t really considered graphic novels. That’s an idea..I think I’m far too slow in my drawing and the books would takes eons to complete haha I’m interested to know will you be aiming to break into the illustration field through freelancing or some other business model avenue?
  6. Nice! That’s a great way to combine your skill set. I think we can at times forget just how many unique attributes we have that can be integrated into our creative work. I aim to combine my love for for literature (philosophy) with my love for realistic art. I’ve started making surrealistic designs on digital which I’ll be morphing quotes and passages into. I think this may turn into book style collections with passages underneath each piece describing them. From my experience and from observing other fellow artists social media is a key resource. Especially Pinterest and Instagram since they are the image heavy platforms. Making artist pages and posting your work and it’s process is definitely a good start.
  7. Thank you for your response. I agree it definitely warrants further discussion. Especially considering the many concerns surrounding it. At the same time there is much we have to learn regarding integrating A.I. as a reliable utility in many of the areas here. I feel fairly aware of many of these developments you shared here. Yet they don’t surprise me either. It’s part of our inevitable development integrating technology. Is it good? Well that’s probably a different discussion. I’m not sure the comparison with traditional art and video editing is an appropriate comparison. After all art was never first initiated through technology. Expedience does not equate to quality. Providing efficient video editing provides many benefits to its user, art on the other hand is not made for this same purpose. Art is more about sentimentality than anything else for the person whom purchases it. This is why hand created art is still so highly demanded. To know A.I. created a piece of art in such a convenient window of time does little increase its value. Art is not about expedience it’s about process and and the inherent meaning behind it. Again from what I can see A.I. is not functioning for this purpose but for the convenience and utility of production. Traditional art is also often embedded with imperfections since it is prone to human error which ironically becomes an important addition to the final work. I assume A.I. will bypass this as it has with programming. Although I see what you are saying. I’m not sure I share this view. As said I’m not convinced A.I. can replicate the intrinsic qualities of creativity. And even if it can at some point in time I still don’t consider this at all the equivalent to a human creating it. Just as do not consider a telephone text message equivalent to sending a hand written letter, the same principle applies here with A.I. As an artist this is a very hard point to convey since there is far more in art than the perceiver knows. A.I. may be able to create breath taking art far more appealing than a traditional artist but as said this is not the same. Trying to make a rational and convincing argument about this is futile for any creative since what is being pointed to can not be simply put into words. A.I. based art may speak more to a general audience who are not art collectors or drawn to the sentimental aspects of art. A lot of your points here are focused on outcome and expediency, which is not the equivalent to art itself. As humans we can disseminate this difference. This is an important distinction to make I feel. Ps. My aim here was not to ensue a debate but to bring attention to the other side of what @Space was sharing. If this is shifting towards a debate I’ll leave our discussion here. Thanks for your contribution nonetheless.
  8. @Space Thank you for making such an important post. I myself as an artist truly appreciate this conversation. I was not aware of the A.I. based art already being on the market but I’m also not surprised. I’ve been contemplating this uprise of technological art hence why I have tasked myself to begin learning digital art. Something I have been putting off for years due to my love for traditional art. Firstly, to your point about artists being replaced by technology, I feel that art is not about the finished product which we perceive and it also is not why people necessarily spend so much money on it. It’s about the sentimentality, the fact that so much work, thought and soul was put into it. This is something A.I. will never achieve in my view. It also puts you at an advantage. For instance, an A.I. can never be you nor accurately replicate you. There are unique things you about you A.I. can never imitate. The fact A.I. May be able to create astounding art is of little significance if the meaning behind it is removed. If it takes you or I many hours to create a piece of art by hand and an A.I. 5 minutes do you think it holds equivalent value? Of course not. Anything quick and easy is cheap. This is the ultimate demise of A.I. in my view. Secondly, I think it’s important to embrace this change. How can you use it to your advantage? I have begun this process of recent by using iPad and procreate to continue my drawing of realism and surrealism (something at first I did not want to do of course). One way I’ve begun doing this is by more recently giving each of my art pieces a biography and description of how they came to be. The name of the piece, what it represents and means, how it may relate to others, what was used to create it and so on. This is also something A.I. cannot do. Something else I plan to do is to merge my love for literature into my art. This will be much easier through digital since I won’t need to perfectly hand write out each letter and risk tarnishing the art work first created. Technology can be enjoyable and useful if you allow your creativity to adopt it as merely a tool. It’s not the means to an end, it’s just one tool and artist can use. It should never substitute the intrinsic qualities it takes to be an artist. In the meantime try not to get sucked into the mire and conveniences of technology. It will never be the same as an artist who has devoted their living and breathing energy to create something truly unique and unreplicable.
  9. Could be a good short term experience. However, I’d say there’s a lot of risk that comes with doing this i.e. surviving the wild, nature can be brutal if your intentions are to remain living. So you’d want to research where you’re going and how you going to survive all the unexpected challenges, of which there are infinite. Theres a lot you just can’t be prepared for in the wild. Despite this I don’t see it being a longterm strategy for providing benefit, given the way society has evolved and ourselves as a result. Saying that retreats from society for periods of time I think would be highly beneficial. You should read the works of Henry Thoreau, in particular his book ‘Walden’. He retreats from society for some time no lives off the land. He really highlights the importance of self preservation, minimalism, gratitude for nature and solitude. He re-enters society later but I imagine this experiment had many benefits.
  10. I’d say the question isn’t what you talk about but the process in how you talk about it. If it’s natural to the moment than its not so much a problem what gets shared. Women typically appreciate men who can be present in the moment. In some situations it’s appropriate, especially for flirting. In others, it’s better to leave it for later. Gauge what gets talked about according to mood and how she is reciprocating with you. This means to remain “outside of your head”. You’ll be surprised what can be talked about if you’re fully present in the engagement.
  11. Just a practical question on LSD. I’m wondering if there is a method that can help shorten the trip duration? This weekend I’ll be doing some 1cp-LSD with a friend. She has never tried it before, however, I have 3 times. In my experience it usually lasts anywhere from 8-12 hours but I feel this will be far too long given we probably won’t be taking it until midday. Is there anything we can take to neutralise the trip early? I usually prefer getting up early to trip but she’s not an early morning riser and lives a fair distance from me. If anyone has some experience in this area would love to hear!
  12. What country are you in? That could play a factor. Most people I match with on bumble message, very few don’t. So you could be right you may need to optimise your profile. Are you smiling and showing your teeth in your photos, women are quite attracted to this. Do your photos have variety (selfie, group photo, indoors, outdoors, different activities etc.). There needs to be layers to your profile for people to be interested in getting to know you. Make your bio and prompts interesting too, write them in ways that encapsulate your unique personality not the algorithm (use words and phrases you actually would). Be different than the norm. Ideally, in person is best but not fully realistic in our day and age unfortunately. Finding events and meets to go can be helpful too and you should be trying to do this. But unless you want to chat up girls in broad day light in public or in a night club with the drunken and disoriented, dating apps are the option. I don’t have any interest in chatting up drunk people or going to night clubs to do so. I prefer in real life at events or on dating apps. Dating apps have been surprisingly effective for me in recent months. Met some great people. But need to find what works for your personality and situation.
  13. Tinder is a horrible app in recent years in my experience. All my recent success has come from Hinge and Bumble. Far superior apps. Tinder has become a hyper-sexualised commodity through which validation is currency (e.g. bathing suit photos and only fans). Hinge and Bumble seem to be mediums through which people are genuinely interested to have conversations. Their design lend them self to better conversations just purely through their prompt options and layout. Good openers can be things like: Tell me something I ought to know about you.. Tell me the one quality you value in a person? What is it that makes you interesting? Or what is it that makes you, You? What’s the first thing you would do if it was your last day on earth? What does your ideal first date look like? I sense there is far more to you then eye catching beauty, tell me am I right? Insert their name before the message too this personalises it. E.g. “Sarah, tell something….”. These are some I made up and have yielded good responses. Never send “hey, how are you?”. This is overly generic. Be different unpredictable, mysterious and curious but also respectful. Remember, women are dynamic and free flowing, your engagements must follow this trend.
  14. Overall you haven’t seemed to say anything extremely problematic, however, I’d suggest a few tweaks. Firstly, I’d recommend giving more freedom in your offers intially. Women usually like to have freedom in their choices and don’t like to feel pressured in early stages of getting to know someone. Rather than saying “want to go on a date” straight off the cuff, say “I’d love to see you again sometime soon” and give her time to respond and express her interest to you. Only be direct after you’ve received that level interest in return. Secondly, give her the freedom to find a suitable time by saying something like “what’s your schedule like this week or next?”. That way she can feel as if you aren’t hunting her down but are considerate of her lifestyle/demands. You can then offer a time and place to meet (key word “offer”). Say something along these lines after she has first expressed equal interest in meeting again - you shouldn’t be meeting someone who doesn’t express interest in you equally. I noticed you have a direct formality in your messaging. Being direct is good but early on can be a massive turn off. It can sub-communicate neediness, domineering behaviour or just a lack of flexibility in your persona. Women are dynamic and find comfort when you can be too. Us men can be rigid robots and this is a massive turn off. Don't get overly stuck on following 1, 2, 3 step formulas, find a way to be relaxed and easy going. Neither should you get overly fixated on locking women into dates as if you are compiling a list. Be natural, fluid and detached. This is far more attractive, especially early on.
  15. As an artist I don’t feel I share this view. It seems you are looking at it more from a utilitarian and pragmatic perspective. Art has not inspired beauty but also informed vision that allows for practical innovators to form their ideas. Take for example M C Escher who pioneered abstract surrealism and the innovation of architecture. Leonardo DaVinci not only created great art but informed much of modern literature. He also merged his philosophy of art with that of other fields such as science, engineering, biology and architecture. I feel you may need to take a more nuanced lens beyond the mechanist benefits we see now in modern technology.