Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Discussion Any blackpiller who don't believe in evolution ?

highschoolcel

highschoolcel

Captain
★★★
Joined
Feb 1, 2018
Posts
1,765
I personally think evolutionism, and particularly evolutionary psychology, are copes.

Let me explain :

If women prefer aggressive, brutal men :
"that's obviously because in the past, such men were better for protection because they were able to fight"

If women prefer empathetic, nice men :
"that's obviously because in the past, such men had higher chances of survival due to not defying society's rules"

It's like, you can always make up a scenario that fits the narrative.

I know I'll be in the minority here, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.
 
Evolutionary psychology is a nonsensical and pseudoscientific branch that attempts to explain human behavior through the lens of evolution.

What makes evolutionary psychology a sham, is the fact that you can have 2 completely different and contradicting statements that are considered true at the same time, as you showed in the example you provided.
 
"that's obviously because in the past, such men had higher chances of survival due to not defying society's rules"
Literally never heard anyone claiming that while i heard the the first example you picked a dozen times
 
Evolution is like a religion. You have to believe in Darwin.
 
I dont completely deny evolution but i have my doubts on it
 
The fact that niggers exist proves that evolution doesn't exist.
 
Evolution is larp
 
evolution is fake and gay
 
Women like good looks, simple as

Psychology is cope
 
I don't think that's possible.
 
Literally never heard anyone claiming that while i heard the the first example you picked a dozen times

Because we know for a fact that 1. Is true (the fact itself, not the why) .

Example 2 was to show how we could just as easily find an « explanation » if 2. Was the case
 
Because we know for a fact that 1. Is true.

Example 2 was to show how we could just as easily find an « explanation » if 2. Was the case
Difference is there is evidence that 1. is true and 2. is just made up stuff without foundation
 
Women like good looks, simple as

Psychology is cope

I think everyone including males prefer beauty in everything because especially in nature beauty goes hand in hand with health and function.
 
I personally think evolutionism, and particularly evolutionary psychology, are copes.

Let me explain :

If women prefer aggressive, brutal men :
"that's obviously because in the past, such men were better for protection because they were able to fight"

If women prefer empathetic, nice men :
"that's obviously because in the past, such men had higher chances of survival due to not defying society's rules"

It's like, you can always make up a scenario that fits the narrative.

I know I'll be in the minority here, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.
Evolution is physically impossible. Thats the most ridicolous theory i ever heard. Even the existence of god is less ridicolous that this "evolution" shit. One specie cant magically become another specie.
 
One specie cant magically become another specie.
Evolution never claimed that. Basically The theory of evolution belives that animals adapt according to their environment which may lead to new traits evolving or if no longer needed traits devolving/dissappearing
 
Evolution never claimed that. Basically The theory of evolution belives that animals adapt according to their environment which may lead to new traits evolving or if no longer needed traits devolving/dissappearing
This is still physically impossible. It has never been proven, and it doesnt make any sense if you think about it. I mean the evolution theory.

Some adaption is theoretically possible, but ive never heard that it has been ever proven, and adaption cant turn one specie into another specie.
 
I personally think evolutionism, and particularly evolutionary psychology, are copes.

Let me explain :

If women prefer aggressive, brutal men :
"that's obviously because in the past, such men were better for protection because they were able to fight"

If women prefer empathetic, nice men :
"that's obviously because in the past, such men had higher chances of survival due to not defying society's rules"

It's like, you can always make up a scenario that fits the narrative.

I know I'll be in the minority here, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.
The difference between the 2 scenario simply is that one will be proved by today reality and the other not.
There was a study that show how dark triad men tend to have more sex, so the first Statment is more close to the truth.
Example = Women prefer taller men so : it's make sense that height in the past was an advantage
Simply as this.
Scientific method
Observe> hypothesis>test>theory
 
This is still physically impossible. It has never been proven, and it doesnt make any sense if you think about it. I mean the evolution theory.

Some adaption is theoretically possible, but ive never heard that it has been ever proven, and adaption cant turn one specie into another specie.
Are you guys serious?
 
The difference between the 2 scenario simply is that one will be proved by today reality and the other not.
There was a study that show how dark triad men tend to have more sex, so the first Statment is more close to the truth.
Example = Women prefer taller men so : it's make sense that height in the past was an advantage
Simply as this.
Scientific method
Observe> hypothesis>test>theory

I might have explained myself incorrectly, because you a friezacel didnt understand what I said.

The fact that women prefer more aggressive men is measured, demonstrated, proven.

There's no denying that.

What I'm saying is that with evolutionary psychology, once we have something proven, we make stories to explain these facts.

In other words, we use these observable facts to "prove" evolutionary psychology, even though if we had opposite facts, we could still make up a story so that they match evolutionary psychology.
 
Last edited:
If women prefer aggressive, brutal men for cock carousel :
"that's obviously because in the past, such men were better for protection because they were able to fight"

If women prefer empathetic, nice men as betabux :
"that's obviously because in the past, such men had higher chances of survival due to not defying society's rules"
 
I personally think evolutionism, and particularly evolutionary psychology, are copes.

Let me explain :

If women prefer aggressive, brutal men :
"that's obviously because in the past, such men were better for protection because they were able to fight"

If women prefer empathetic, nice men :
"that's obviously because in the past, such men had higher chances of survival due to not defying society's rules"

It's like, you can always make up a scenario that fits the narrative.

I know I'll be in the minority here, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.
Everybody hates ugly men. It doesn't really matter why, it just matters that that's the case.
 
What I'm saying is that with evolutionary psychology, once we have something proven, we make stories to explain these facts
Ok now I understand what you mean.
And you are right, at the end of the day a theory is just a theory and we can only choose the more close to the truth even if it will be never the truth.
Form this point is similar to religion.
But anyway if you think about it information are used to gain power not for the truth.
Science is always about power, so I guess it's ok after all
 
I might have explained myself incorrectly, because you a friezacel didnt understand what I said.

The fact that women prefer more aggressive men is measured, demonstrated, proven.

There's no denying that.

What I'm saying is that with evolutionary psychology, once we have something proven, we make stories to explain these facts.

In other words, we use these observable facts to "prove" evolutionary psychology, even though if we had opposite facts, we could still make up a story so that they match evolutionary psychology.
Because a lot of the details of evolution are speculative, eg. why specific traits evolved in specific ways, but the underlying fact of evolution is proven. We're all products of millennia of evolution and natural selection. And we've only been civilised for a few thousand years. So pretty much everything we are, think, feel and do is a consequence of evolution, and has some evolutionary imperative at the root of it. Given that we lived like relative barbarians for hundreds of thousands of years, it's very logical to assume that aggressive men were more valued than non-aggressive men, and reproduced more.
 
Because a lot of the details of evolution are speculative, eg. why specific traits evolved in specific ways, but the underlying fact of evolution is proven. We're all products of millennia of evolution and natural selection. And we've only been civilised for a few thousand years. So pretty much everything we are, think, feel and do is a consequence of evolution, and has some evolutionary imperative at the root of it. Given that we lived like relative barbarians for hundreds of thousands of years, it's very logical to assume that aggressive men were more valued than non-aggressive men, and reproduced more.

Yeah, not gonna have this debate here brocel :smonk:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top