Why do almost all 'incels' blame their situation on looks?

Page 13 of 32 [ 474 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 32  Next

rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,736
Location: Sweden

19 Aug 2019, 3:29 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
Throwing this one back - I really found rdos and Mona Pereth's conversation about the presence (or lack) of biologically occult or electromagnetically occult activity in how people socialize (and an odd but interesting thread for that to show up in!).


Surely an odd context, and perhaps it should be placed in another thread. :mrgreen:

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
My take on this from my own experiences would be that this bifurcates in two ways:

1) The subconscious and evolutionary biological level, where to some degree Aldus Huxley was right about there being a massive reducing valve on consciousness and the subconscious only giving the conscious mind the most low-resolution or high-level intimations of what's happening, largely over neurological bandwidth concerns. This tends to be part of why nonverbal communication is counted more important than verbal, ie. it's the world of emotional reactions, hunches, intuitions, and the rather sad part about this zone - it's either very difficult to socialize in the secular humanist sense and tends to prefer animal pragmatism to Greek philosophy or there's a deep sense in most people that they wouldn't want to transform this level of themselves even if they could, ie. a nagging sense that most of what our culture says it is to be human is mostly lies and if they socialize or intellectualize that level of themselves too much they'd be come.... well..... autistic.

2) As far as quantum or quantum-like behavior in consciousness, I'm uncomfortable with using that exact terminology because we don't know the exact mechanism for influence at a distance or downward causality from a larger disconnected structure to an individual but I think terms like dual-action monism or certain kinds of idealism aren't particularly bad for this. In this case the best way to describe what you're seeing - there are graphic models of what it looks like when a cell is dividing and certain proteins are carrying other proteins across telomeres, and the behavior of these proteins looks like it would need some type of programming to do what it's doing just that it doesn't seem to have enough 'stuff' in it to answer that with internal clockwork coding. That example may or may not turn out to ultimately be the case but I think it works well with intuition, ie. that a lot of protein activities in the body are likely 'remote controlled' lets say in a top-down manner. The human body actually seems to be loaded with example of bottom up emergence and communication and then top-down results and it's a constant cycling between the two that makes us up.

As a continuation of 2) it seems like when you have a new entity emerge out of a combination of smaller entities, like tissues out of cells, organs out of tissues, people or animals out of organs, you have something of a contextual rotation where communication between layers is very specific and narrow. I would make the argument that when people have occult experiences - whether it's massive wall of synchronicities hitting them over the course of a week, whether it's being well familiar with the rules of life as a sort of flat surface and all of a sudden for a short period of time a bizarre sort of acausal wave sweeps through and leaves them wondering what that was about, or even some sort of 'angelic', 'demonic', 'diefic', etc. contacts are at least partly explained by downward causation from a larger system. This is something in line with the sort of functionalist theory of consciousness that people like Hillary Putnam put forward, ie. that technically with these kinds of combinations it would make sense to have something like a 'China Brain', and little scraps of this based on local groups, organizations, something that gets written about a lot in French 18th and 19th century occult literature under the term 'egregore'.


I have many issues with consciousness and quantum stuff. I think much of quantum stuff is only relevant at the atomic level (if even there). I'm actually a non-believer when it comes to this, and I think it can be explained in intuitively more sane ways. As for much of the consciousness claims, I find them unreasonable, biased & useless. I actually find much of the spiritual & occult stuff strange and not very helpful either. :mrgreen:

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
With all of that I don't think you'd have person to person psychism but might you have a larger sentient system trying to control certain social or dating outcomes? Sure. The downside here as well - there may be no guarantee that the whole is greater that the sum of its parts, ie. that egregores or even mass minds trying to pull the levers on people or groups may very well barely be conscious or may be quite animalistic in their simple goals of staying alive at any cost.


It's an empirical fact that NDs have more supernatural & spiritual beliefs, while at the same time tending to be more atheist. Organized religion is not so much about spirituals beliefs (other than using them to prove your religion is true), rather functions more as an additional level of authority in the social hierarchy that rulers have long used to control people. ND spirituality is very different, and might very well be based on the person to person "psychism" ties they can form. Other types of supernatural beliefs & abilities quite likely are just "flaws" in this trait. For instance, you could interpret the messages as being divine and then you could contribute to the tales of a religion. These messages can also be misinterpreted in many other ways.

I think spiritual & occult claims must be explainable in the physical word. That excludes things like mind-reading, things that break causality and things that can happen over infinite distances. I wouldn't exclude the possibility that mind-to-mind communication could use other physical mediums other than electromagnetic photons in the MHz band, but it seems to be the best medium available. I wouldn't want to use quantum effects since this would be too speculative and impossible to prove. Every scientific theory/hypothesis must be possible to evaluate, and I definitely think the electromagnetic version of mind-to-mind communication falls into that domain, while much of the supernatural, occult and religious claims don't.



techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 20,804
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

19 Aug 2019, 5:50 am

rdos wrote:
I have many issues with consciousness and quantum stuff. I think much of quantum stuff is only relevant at the atomic level (if even there). I'm actually a non-believer when it comes to this, and I think it can be explained in intuitively more sane ways. As for much of the consciousness claims, I find them unreasonable, biased & useless. I actually find much of the spiritual & occult stuff strange and not very helpful either. :mrgreen:

My own problem with calling it 'quantum' is that while it might have a duck's bill, webbed feet, and even quack, it could just as easily be a platipus so there's not much point in saying it's more than an analogy for the quirkiness of something's behavior.

As for the rest - in our present culture there's really no reason to give the occult or mystical a second glance unless one has had enough truly unexplainable things happen to you that the pendulum of credulity or complexity of explanations needed shifts back the other way and I'd admit that I'm in that position where I've had to throw away reductive materialism as a total-reality framework albeit I tend to agree with John Gray a lot, both in terms of pessimism and in terms of the flimsiness I see in naive materialism.

rdos wrote:
I think spiritual & occult claims must be explainable in the physical word. That excludes things like mind-reading, things that break causality and things that can happen over infinite distances. I wouldn't exclude the possibility that mind-to-mind communication could use other physical mediums other than electromagnetic photons in the MHz band, but it seems to be the best medium available. I wouldn't want to use quantum effects since this would be too speculative and impossible to prove. Every scientific theory/hypothesis must be possible to evaluate, and I definitely think the electromagnetic version of mind-to-mind communication falls into that domain, while much of the supernatural, occult and religious claims don't.

I think this is part of why no one feels comfortable talking about these sorts of things even if they're pretty sure that there's something there - any useful explanation seems like its too far out and too far beyond anything we have proper tools to get insight into.

I might clarify though 'occult' in my mind would just mean hidden in the sense of things we don't presently see easily, things we either don't have the tools to examine or in some cases have just discarded not on evidence but rather sociological, political, or ideological battles (those really evidence themselves whenever you see a grown adult's level of discourse go from PhD, Masters, or whatever else down to grade school). Things like 20th century theosophy seem like good examples of simply being BS and and I'd separate the hidden and snake oil into separate categories. Also when people use words like 'supernatural' in my mind they'd be tantamount to 'not real' because nature as we currently view it subsumes everything, to that extent a supernatural model of the occult seems to fall into anachronism. That's not denying 'supernatural' experiences or even beings, it's just looking for their causes in nature rather than in religious texts (unless you're heavily reinterpreting those religious texts through a modern understanding such that words like 'angel' or 'demon' could refer to real things but not what the text would explain them to be).

I think one of the most interesting ideas I heard recently was the durability of the notion that space-time is projected from a 2D sheet of data, something like what becomes apparent at the event horizon of black holes (preservation of data) but extending out across all of space and time. I might have mentioned this earlier but if I were to peg consciousness to something, if panpsychism falls down because matter isn't really 'stuff' I might suspect that the fields themselves have something to do with conscious experience. The question I'd have to answer with that hypothesis is which is more primary, ie. is that 2D sheet of data composed of fields or are fields emergent from that 2D sheet of data? Whichever of the two is the base line would be more primary than what emerges from it. Either of those two would fit well though with neutral monism or dual-action monism which is the theory of consciousness that would make the most sense IMHO.


_________________
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privelege of owning yourself" - Rudyard Kipling


rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,736
Location: Sweden

19 Aug 2019, 6:39 am

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
As for the rest - in our present culture there's really no reason to give the occult or mystical a second glance unless one has had enough truly unexplainable things happen to you that the pendulum of credulity or complexity of explanations needed shifts back the other way and I'd admit that I'm in that position where I've had to throw away reductive materialism as a total-reality framework albeit I tend to agree with John Gray a lot, both in terms of pessimism and in terms of the flimsiness I see in naive materialism.


I don't believe in the reductive materialism either, but I don't feel I can use religious stuff with the purpose of exploiting the masses as a useful alternative. I'm pretty much open to what happens after death, and I don't discard ghosts or that the soul might survive (at least for a while) after death. Actually, I have several strange experiences with people that have contacted me directly after they died.

I've not always been positive to the spiritual stuff and I used to think there were always natural explanations. I was convinced that the mind-to-mind communication worked based on the amount of evidence I had which couldn't be explained in any other way. So, today I no longer doubt that it exists and works, rather I'm curious exactly how it works and what kind of exchanges that can be made. I also have other people I know that had somewhat similar experiences.

techstepgenr8tion wrote:
I might clarify though 'occult' in my mind would just mean hidden in the sense of things we don't presently see easily, things we either don't have the tools to examine or in some cases have just discarded not on evidence but rather sociological, political, or ideological battles (those really evidence themselves whenever you see a grown adult's level of discourse go from PhD, Masters, or whatever else down to grade school). Things like 20th century theosophy seem like good examples of simply being BS and and I'd separate the hidden and snake oil into separate categories. Also when people use words like 'supernatural' in my mind they'd be tantamount to 'not real' because nature as we currently view it subsumes everything, to that extent a supernatural model of the occult seems to fall into anachronism. That's not denying 'supernatural' experiences or even beings, it's just looking for their causes in nature rather than in religious texts (unless you're heavily reinterpreting those religious texts through a modern understanding such that words like 'angel' or 'demon' could refer to real things but not what the text would explain them to be).


That's more or less my opinion too. We shouldn't discard everything that currently cannot be explained as fantasy or "supernatural", rather we should be curious & open-minded and explore anything that could be explored with scientific methods, and refrain from labeling it as "not real" until there is sufficient proof it isn't real. When scientists discard lots of things they don't like or understand, lack of progress will result. This is both the case with autism research and with spiritual/occult research.



techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 20,804
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

19 Aug 2019, 12:14 pm

Yeah, I think it's neither with the religious narrative nor the hallucination narrative, it sits best perhaps within the behavior of Darwinian evolution.

If you do want to chat more on it we could probably PM, ie. I could throw a lot of Ian McGilchrist and Time Freke, Glitch Bottle, etc. your way and we might have fun punting that stuff back and forth. Lots of good post-materialist thinkers out there as well as guys and ladies who are trying to take similar approaches to exploring and interpreting the Solomonic / Goetic stuff from the Renaissance.


_________________
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privelege of owning yourself" - Rudyard Kipling


hurtloam
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Mar 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,760
Location: Eyjafjallajökull

19 Aug 2019, 1:08 pm

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Quote:
And I find it really insulting if a woman shows interest in me because I'm "safe", rather than because I'm sexy and desirable.


Same - this is very logical.

As I mentioned earlier, if the woman I am dating can’t see me as her favorite “pornstar” (in her eyes) then this relationship will be lacking; it is very important to be her fantasty, “liking my personality” is not enough.

If not then she will eventually either cheat on me with someone she really lusts or the relationship will be totally sexless or it will feel like a business transaction; yuck at all these scenarios.


I understand this. I knocked someone back... one of the 2 people I've ever knocked back... when I was 26 because he just seemed to want to settle down with anyone and had asked out all of my other friends before asking me. That sort of thing surely can't work out well.

Yes, it felt more like a proposal for a transaction more than anything.


_________________
So long and thanks for all the fish


Marknis
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Jan 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,868
Location: The Vile Belt

19 Aug 2019, 1:29 pm

I’ve been accused of being an incel as well as advocating for PUA and Red Pill because of my struggles in even getting a coffee date. All three things are wrong. I don’t blame women for my struggles but for the culture I live in. The ones who advocate for PUA and Red Pill are usually from people from more liberal areas who actually want to move to the Bible Belt because they think it’s an utopia.



Mona Pereth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Sep 2018
Age: 61
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,546
Location: New York City (Queens)

19 Aug 2019, 8:49 pm

Marknis wrote:
The ones who advocate for PUA and Red Pill are usually from people from more liberal areas who actually want to move to the Bible Belt because they think it’s an utopia.

That's interesting. Has anyone ever actually done a survey of where these guys are from?

Of course, if a non-religious man from a more liberal area moves to the Bible Belt, he's going to have an even harder time finding a girlfriend, because religious Christian women want religious Christian husbands, and because men in general outnumber women in general in rural areas whereas women are the majority in liberal urban areas.


_________________
- Finally diagnosed with ASD in May 2019, after having suspected it for over ten years, and after having deeply explored the autism community for over one year while waiting for and obtaining diagnosis.
- In longterm relationship with boyfriend who was diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome in 2001.
- Long history of participation in various oddball subcultures.
- My "Getting to know each other" thread: Hello from NYC.


BDavro
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 678

19 Aug 2019, 9:02 pm

Why is it alright to use the slur 'incel'?

I mean, it's a pretty bad thing to call someone.



Rainbow_Belle
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

Joined: 16 Jan 2019
Gender: Female
Posts: 60
Location: Sydney

19 Aug 2019, 9:33 pm

The term incel is used as an modern day insult that has replaced terms like loser, virgin, retard or Autistic. Self identifying as incel adds no value and only attracts hate and negative criticism and judgment from haters that have no empathy towards you. People are fearful, ignorant and express hatred towards people they do not understand. The vicious circle of hate within society will never ever end and that applies to politics, religion, gender, sexuality, social status, etc



BDavro
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 678

19 Aug 2019, 9:36 pm

Rainbow_Belle wrote:
The term incel is used as an modern day insult that has replaced terms like loser, virgin, retard or Autistic. Self identifying as incel adds no value and only attracts hate and negative criticism and judgment from haters that have no empathy towards you. People are fearful, ignorant and express hatred towards people they do not understand. The vicious circle of hate within society will never ever end and that applies to politics, religion, gender, sexuality, social status, etc


Can't really argue with that, snopes says true.



Marknis
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Jan 2016
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,868
Location: The Vile Belt

19 Aug 2019, 10:18 pm

Mona Pereth wrote:
Marknis wrote:
The ones who advocate for PUA and Red Pill are usually from people from more liberal areas who actually want to move to the Bible Belt because they think it’s an utopia.

That's interesting. Has anyone ever actually done a survey of where these guys are from?

Of course, if a non-religious man from a more liberal area moves to the Bible Belt, he's going to have an even harder time finding a girlfriend, because religious Christian women want religious Christian husbands, and because men in general outnumber women in general in rural areas whereas women are the majority in liberal urban areas.


There hasn’t been one as far as I know.

A lot of these men are actually religious and hate how religion plays less of a role in liberal areas so they think if they move to the Bible Belt, Christian women will throw themselves at them. The sad truth for them is that being a Christian man doesn’t automatically translate to getting a Christian girlfriend. I grew up a Christian and most of the girls I went to school with were Christian but did that get me a girlfriend? No, it did not. Some of the incels I’ve encountered actually praise Islam and want the Western world to be “Islamized” because they think it will destroy both Secularism and Feminism.



Aspie1
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Mar 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,534
Location: United States

19 Aug 2019, 10:33 pm

BDavro wrote:
Why is it alright to use the slur 'incel'?

I mean, it's a pretty bad thing to call someone.

It's not really a slur. It's a self-identifier that went mainstream. It's a shorthand for "involuntarily celibate". Some people even make a distinction between incel (lowercase) and Incel (uppercase). When spelled in lowercase, it simply means a man who can't get sex, and is therefore involuntarily celibate. (Women can be celibate, but it's extremely rare for them to be that way involuntarily.) When spelled in uppercase, it's refers to a loosely organized hate movement, that promotes male supremacy and opposes feminism. Of course, confusion arises when the word appears in the beginning of a sentence. It is the latter, not the former, that WrongPlanet wants gone, but this distinction is lost on many people, and the two get lumped into one category. Hence, the derision toward men who can't meet women easily.



BDavro
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 May 2019
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 678

19 Aug 2019, 10:37 pm

I was not having a go, I was making an appeal for equality.

Calling someone an incel and dismissing them is a shitty thing to do, it's a bullshit popular term these days.



techstepgenr8tion
SomeRandomGuy
SomeRandomGuy

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 20,804
Location: The 27th Path of Peh.

19 Aug 2019, 10:38 pm

Blue Monday / Monday FA Monday talking sociological gaps again:


_________________
"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. To be your own man is a hard business. If you try it, you'll be lonely often, and sometimes frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privelege of owning yourself" - Rudyard Kipling


The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,619
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

20 Aug 2019, 12:01 am

Quote:
Side note - I just got done reading Frank Herbert's Dune and I found myself liking a lot of what he did when it came to addressing the collective unconscious or something similar - ie. it would be very brutal, very biology and gene centered, race minds, etc. and to the degree that I think there may be a very real 'woo' it's something much more like a Darwinian evolutionary cake with some amount of idealist or quantum-mechanical frosting or glaze.


Incels are house Harkonnen. :mrgreen: