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.

Serious The Blackpill is Not an Ideology

  • Thread starter AtrociousCitizen
  • Start date
AtrociousCitizen

AtrociousCitizen

Consumed by Fury
★★★★★
Joined
Oct 11, 2024
Posts
87,406
I am tired of the Blackpill being treated as an ideology. It is not an ideology, nor will it ever be one. It is simply a raw representation of reality—nothing more, nothing less. To treat it as anything else would be illogical.

To label the Blackpill as an ideology is contradictory to what it really is and undermines its entire point. By definition ideologies are systems of beliefs - and beliefs, by their very nature, are not necessarily grounded in reality. Ideologies are used as a foundation for societies, economics, and politics, regardless of the veracity and objectivity of the ideas and opinions they include within them.

On the other hand, the Blackpill is simply the truth, and whether you "believe" in it or not, it will remain that. It is there to explain the different dynamics in society and the injustices that we face as a result of biological and evolutionary reasons. It is not based on belief, but on observable reality—much like the laws of physics themselves.
 

ill just leave this here
 
It can be both
 
Denying the blackpill is denying reality
 
The blackpill is just a collection of facts
 
It can be both
You can't have your cake and eat it too. An ideology, by definition, is a system of beliefs — one that can be followed, or not. This implies that there is room to choose and that you are not forced to believe in the particular ideology. However, the blackpill philosophy is not something that you "choose" to follow. It is simply a realistic, objective representation of reality that we have all been forced into.

I do agree that it could lead to certain beliefs and a sort of an ideology forming to deal with the reality, but that's something else.
 
The Blackpill is the truth and the only truth
 
But it should and will be. Communist saw a class antagonisms and it led to logical consequence that's a communism system. We see antagonisms and hypergamy that foid scum cause and it shall lead to a logical consequence of it that's a blackpillist system.
 
Last edited:
The blackpill is just a collection of facts
This exactly. It doesn't tell you how to live your life, it's information you can choose what to do with. The rise of gynocentric blackpillers thanks to Tails YT channel and blackpill TikTok shows this perfectly
 
Last edited:
It can be both
The blackpill is a set of facts that can inform an ideology, but it can't be an ideology in and of itself.
But i should and will be. Communist saw a class antagonisms and it led to logical consequence that's a communism system. We see antagonisms and hypergamy that foid scum cause and it shall lead to a logical consequence of it that's a blackpillist system.
The ideology that suggests seizing the means of reproduction is called "Sexual Marxism" :feelsLSD:
 
The ideology that suggests seizing the means of reproduction is called "Sexual Marxism" :feelsLSD:
Indeed, blackpillism and marxism-rodgerism are in fact very similar. It currently lacks a solid ideological base (not counting The Blackpillist Manifesto), but will not.
 
Last edited:
High IQ post. Bluepillers is a cult ideology, we're just materialists
 
You can't have your cake and eat it too. An ideology, by definition, is a system of beliefs — one that can be followed, or not. This implies that there is room to choose and that you are not forced to believe in the particular ideology. However, the blackpill philosophy is not something that you "choose" to follow. It is simply a realistic, objective representation of reality that we have all been forced into.

I do agree that it could lead to certain beliefs and a sort of an ideology forming to deal with the reality, but that's something else.
I mean anything thats "objective" requires belief. Hair splitting a bit but i get your point.
The blackpill is a set of facts that can inform an ideology, but it can't be an ideology in and of itself.

The ideology that suggests seizing the means of reproduction is called "Sexual Marxism" :feelsLSD:
What would you call that ideology? I would call it Blackpill ideology
 
What would you call that ideology? I would call it Blackpill ideology
It depends on how the blackpill actually informs said ideology aka what the ideology actually aims to achieve. The blackpill can inform a Socialism-esque system that seeks to seize and equally redistribute the means of reproduction among all men. It could also inform a hardcore eugenicist system that seeks to genocide all sub-5 males and femlets and implement some Lebensborn-esque program to improve the physical quality of a population. What you would call a certain blackpill-informed ideology depends on the specifics of said ideology
 
Or just blackpill for short
Both names are good. Although using the one you suggested above will force everyone who see the true nature of the foids scum to associate with our pollitical beliefs, since "blackpill" will be name for both, ideology and acknowledgment of their nature :feelsthink::feelsthink::feelsthink:
 
You can't have your cake and eat it too. An ideology, by definition, is a system of beliefs — one that can be followed, or not. This implies that there is room to choose and that you are not forced to believe in the particular ideology. However, the blackpill philosophy is not something that you "choose" to follow. It is simply a realistic, objective representation of reality that we have all been forced into.

I do agree that it could lead to certain beliefs and a sort of an ideology forming to deal with the reality, but that's something else.

:bigbrain: very based thread, very high IQ.
 
Last edited:
But it should and will be. Communist saw a class antagonisms and it led to logical consequence that's a communism system. We see antagonisms and hypergamy that foid scum cause and it shall lead to a logical consequence of it that's a blackpillist system.
Indeed. When issues are noticed and there's not a suitable or correct system that aims to fix them then a whole new ideology that aims to solve these problems pops up.
 
Well, as always there are facts (looks do matter) and there are conclusions we draw from them. IT cucks will go like woohoo more power for foids!!! While incels will go like woohoo total foid death!!! Notice that neither can be derived from the facts. It's all our moral judgement. Moral facts do not exist, as they say.
 
Last edited:
High IQ post. Bluepillers is a cult ideology, we're just materialists
Appreciate it brocel. And yeah, bluepill is also inherently flawed because it prioritizes emotions, feelings, and the just world fallacy over factual, observable, and logical principles. It is the exact opposite of what's in reality.
 
Well, as always there are facts (looks do matter) and there are conclusions we draw from them. IT cucks will go like woohoo more power for foids!!! While incels will go like woohoo total foid death!!! Notice that neither can be derived from the facts. It's all our moral judgement. Moral facts do not exist, as they say.
This is a fair point. Even if everyone agrees they are presented with the same evidence, they can arrive at different conclusions or opinions.
 
It depends on how the blackpill actually informs said ideology aka what the ideology actually aims to achieve. The blackpill can inform a Socialism-esque system that seeks to seize and equally redistribute the means of reproduction among all men. It could also inform a hardcore eugenicist system that seeks to genocide all sub-5 males and femlets and implement some Lebensborn-esque program to improve the physical quality of a population. What you would call a certain blackpill-informed ideology depends on the specifics of said ideology
Ideologies dont have to be political. It can be a sociological one like it kinda already is.
 
Normies portray it as an ideology so that they can easily deny it as a retarded movement by mentally ill ERs in the making. they just want sub5s normies incel in denials aka oofy doofys aka beta buxer to keep coping and making bread for chads and foids cruel world man
 
Normies portray it as an ideology so that they can easily deny it as a retarded movement by mentally ill ERs in the making. they just want sub5s normies incel in denials aka oofy doofys aka beta buxer to keep coping and making bread for chads and foids cruel world man
Indeed. They label the blackpill as an "ideology" in order to discredit its validity. By calling it an ideology or a movement, they are trying to make it seem as if the people who believe in it are irrational or delusional, when really, they are simply acknowledging truth.

Can you really blame them though? Since, in a sense—facing the truth would absolutely shatter their perception of society and humans. It would force them to come face to face with the brutal truths they have spent so much time trying to ignore.
 
No one has been able to disprove the black pill with any argument yet. That says enough about its truth.
 
its more off a science
 
To label the Blackpill as an ideology is contradictory to what it really is and undermines its entire point
the Blackpill is simply the truth
Unless the truth has a point, the blackpill wouldn't have a point if it was merely a collection of truths. By admitting you think it has a point, you admit to thinking of it as being more than just a collection of truths (unless you sincerely believe the truth has a point...)
By definition ideologies are systems of beliefs - and beliefs, by their very nature, are not necessarily grounded in reality
But they're not necessarily unfounded either. Plenty of ideologies are based on grounded beliefs -- e.g., the blackpill, because...
It is there to explain the different dynamics in society and the injustices that we face as a result of biological and evolutionary reasons
...explanations and reasons are grounded beliefs, not empirical truths.
It is not based on belief, but on observable reality
Here you seem to suggest you really mean unfounded beliefs, which would invalidate your earlier critique of ideologies, because, as I mentioned before, plenty of ideologies are based on grounded beliefs.
 
It is the way, the truth and the life
 
No one has been able to disprove the black pill with any argument yet. That says enough about its truth.
That is true. No one can disprove the Blackpill because it's simply a reflection of reality. It's not something that can be argued against; it's simply something that exists. It's like trying to disprove the laws of physics.
 
Unless the truth has a point, the blackpill wouldn't have a point if it was merely a collection of truths. By admitting you think it has a point, you admit to thinking of it as being more than just a collection of truths (unless you sincerely believe the truth has a point...)
...explanations and reasons are grounded beliefs, not empirical truths.
This is tangential to my original point and it seems to me like you are blurring the lines between explanation, belief, and ideology. My original point was that the blackpill is an explanation and an understanding of reality as it is. It is not a belief, an ideology, or a set of ideas that one adheres to. It is a reality that you learn about through study, observation, and critical thought, not something you merely "believe" to be true. To think that an explanation is not empirical truth is flawed. For example, saying "gravity pulls objects downward" isn't a belief—it’s an explanation derived from empirical truth. Analogously, the Blackpill is a compilation of explanations grounded in empirical observations, without necessarily being an ideology.
 
its more like a philosophy than an ideology since it teaches you how you should view the world
 
you are blurring the lines between explanation, belief, and ideology
Look at how the Merriam-Webster defines ideologies:
Untitled

the blackpill easily fits senses 1a (characteristic of incels) and 1c. Or have a look at how belief is defined:
Untitled

the scientific blackpill is contingent on you trusting the science (sense 1) and sense 3 is exactly what I meant by a grounded belief.
explanations and reasons are grounded beliefs
OK this is technically wrong. I was writing right before bedtime, sorry. But holding explanations and reasons as true does constitute belief. And of what value is an explanation everyone deems false?
To think that an explanation is not empirical truth is flawed. For example, saying "gravity pulls objects downward" isn't a belief—it’s an explanation derived from empirical truth
Derived from empirical truth ≠ empirical truth. Derivations are rational as opposed to empirical after all.
the Blackpill is a compilation of explanations grounded in empirical observations
the same can be said for Keynesianism, which Wikipedia categorizes under eponymous economic ideologies. What makes ideologies ideologies is the surrounding social landscape. I think it's disingenuous to pretend the blackpill is nothing more than a bunch of explanations. It's like insisting Islam is nothing more than the Quran.
 
Derived from empirical truth ≠ empirical truth. Derivations are rational as opposed to empirical after all.
If we follow your logic then nothing can ever be empirical truth. Everything can, in some way, be reduced to a rational derivation based on sensory input, no matter how far the rabbit hole goes. This is a classic "Cartesian skepticism" argument, where you argue that we can never truly know what is reality—because everything is based on some kind of belief.

So if that's your argument—then fine—but I doubt you live your own life as if everything you know and believe was based on irrational, baseless, false information.

What makes ideologies ideologies is the surrounding social landscape. I think it's disingenuous to pretend the blackpill is nothing more than a bunch of explanations.
I see where you are coming from, but let me ask you this. What do you consider the "surrounding social landscape" for the Blackpill? Is there a set of social or political ideas that the Blackpill is based upon? Is there a collective social or political belief system that we share as blackpillers? Is there even a social movement behind it, pushing for some sort of agenda other than simply acknowledging reality?

To conflate the blackpill with an ideology is to overlook the core point of it. It is an observation of reality.

It's like insisting Islam is nothing more than the Quran.
Your comparison is not quite accurate. The Quran is a religious text, and Islam is a religion. The Blackpill is not a religion or a religious text—it's a scientific theory. The Blackpill can be compared to a branch of science, for instance evolution.

Islam includes a lot of non-Quranic teachings and customs. These teachings, while rooted in the Quran, are derived from different interpretations and perspectives—scriptures, hadiths, etc. The Blackpill, however, doesn't allow for different interpretations. The Blackpill is merely a set of irrefutable truths about the way reality operates and its truths are non-negotiable. How you choose to interpret the truths of the blackpill is up to you as an individual—but that doesn't change the truth that the Blackpill presents.
 
Last edited:
If we follow your logic then nothing can ever be empirical truth. Everything can, in some way, be reduced to a rational derivation based on sensory input, no matter how far the rabbit hole goes. This is a classic "Cartesian skepticism" argument, where you argue that we can never truly know what is reality—because everything is based on some kind of belief.
I didn't mean to include sensory intake as part of derivation. To use your erstwhile example of gravity pulling objects downward (on earth): that objects are being pulled downward (on earth) is empirical fact, whereas postulating there's a force called gravity facilitating the pull is belief. Indeed, forces cannot be empirically witnessed, only their supposed effects.
What do you consider the "surrounding social landscape" for the Blackpill?
those who are blackpilled -- i.e., primarily the incelosphere
Is there a set of social or political ideas that the Blackpill is based upon? Is there a collective social or political belief system that we share as blackpillers? Is there even a social movement behind it, pushing for some sort of agenda other than simply acknowledging reality?
there are things in this direction. Many blackpillers disapprove of women's sexual practices for example. I'm not necessarily insisting the blackpill is quintessentially ideological, but dismissing it's remotely ideological with conviction is the other extreme.
Your comparison is not quite accurate. The Quran is a religious text, and Islam is a religion. The Blackpill is not a religion or a religious text—it's a scientific theory. The Blackpill can be compared to a branch of science, for instance evolution.
Within science there's the hard and soft sciences. If a science, the blackpill is a soft science. In a sense the soft sciences are closer to religion than to the hard sciences. What typifies the hard sciences is that they make empirically verifiable predictions -- e.g., how long it takes objects to fall. What typifies the soft sciences (and religions) is that they offer explanations for ostensible causalities -- e.g., why people do this and that.
Islam includes a lot of non-Quranic teachings and customs. These teachings, while rooted in the Quran, are derived from different interpretations and perspectives—scriptures, hadiths, etc.
What would you call JBW then?
The Blackpill, however, doesn't allow for different interpretations. The Blackpill is merely a set of irrefutable truths about the way reality operates and its truths are non-negotiable. How you choose to interpret the truths of the blackpill is up to you as an individual—but that doesn't change the truth that the Blackpill presents.
I want to clarify something. Do you take the blackpill to be a) a collection of data, b) explanations for said data, or c) both? I was under the impression that we were treating the blackpill as b) but I'm starting to think your perspective may be different.
 
I didn't mean to include sensory intake as part of derivation. To use your erstwhile example of gravity pulling objects downward (on earth): that objects are being pulled downward (on earth) is empirical fact, whereas postulating there's a force called gravity facilitating the pull is belief. Indeed, forces cannot be empirically witnessed, only their supposed effects.
I see, I must have misunderstood your initial point. I thought you were implying that sensory input was included in the derivation—but I can see what you mean now.

I'm still not entirely sure how the empirical facts in this instance differ from the purported force of gravity. After all, one could argue that the very notion of something being pulled downward is just as "theoretical" as the idea that a "force" is responsible for the phenomenon.

There's no way to definitively prove that there is a force called gravity pulling objects downward, as that would be beyond what we can possibly observe.

there are things in this direction. Many blackpillers disapprove of women's sexual practices for example. I'm not necessarily insisting the blackpill is quintessentially ideological, but dismissing it's remotely ideological with conviction is the other extreme.
So what you are saying is that the blackpill in and of itself is not an ideology—and I would agree. And that doesn't mean that some blackpillers themselves don't also have various ideologies and beliefs and opinions that have developed as a result of the blackpill knowledge. With that I can absolutely agree.

Within science there's the hard and soft sciences. If a science, the blackpill is a soft science. In a sense the soft sciences are closer to religion than to the hard sciences. What typifies the hard sciences is that they make empirically verifiable predictions -- e.g., how long it takes objects to fall. What typifies the soft sciences (and religions) is that they offer explanations for ostensible causalities -- e.g., why people do this and that.
I have to disagree with your premise—you say that the hard sciences are characterized by their ability to make predictions that are empirically verifiable. But consider biology, for example. Many theories in biology attempt to explain relationships and phenomena, providing explanations rather than predictions, similar to what you consider soft sciences. Does that mean biology is a soft science now? I'm aware it's often regarded as one, but the way you are framing soft sciences and hard sciences makes it appear as if it's simply a black and white thing.

As for your last point, I'd say that religion and soft sciences can be distinguished by their epistemology. Religion relies on faith, while soft sciences depend on empirical evidence and rational inquiry.

I want to clarify something. Do you take the blackpill to be a) a collection of data, b) explanations for said data, or c) both? I was under the impression that we were treating the blackpill as b) but I'm starting to think your perspective may be different.
I take the blackpill to be both A and B.

In my opinion the blackpill is both a collection of observable data (i.e. the realities that the Blackpill purports to uncover) and a set of explanations (i.e. concepts such as "lookism," "hypergamy," "natural selection," etc.) that attempt to make sense of this data.

The data includes both observable phenomena (such as dating app statistics, surveys on attractiveness ratings, etc.) as well as theoretical concepts (like the Halo Effect, etc.)
 
Last edited:
I'm still not entirely sure how the empirical facts in this instance differ from the purported force of gravity. After all, one could argue that the very notion of something being pulled downward is just as "theoretical" as the idea that a "force" is responsible for the phenomenon.
fair point, "pulled downward" sounds very suggestive. More correct would be to say that the downward motion is empirical fact.
So what you are saying is that the blackpill in and of itself is not an ideology—and I would agree. And that doesn't mean that some blackpillers themselves don't also have various ideologies and beliefs and opinions that have developed as a result of the blackpill knowledge. With that I can absolutely agree.
that's not quite what I was getting at. I'm saying that the blackpill -- from a sociological POV -- exhibits ideological signs.
I have to disagree with your premise—you say that the hard sciences are characterized by their ability to make predictions that are empirically verifiable. But consider biology, for example. Many theories in biology attempt to explain relationships and phenomena, providing explanations rather than predictions, similar to what you consider soft sciences. Does that mean biology is a soft science now? I'm aware it's often regarded as one, but the way you are framing soft sciences and hard sciences makes it appear as if it's simply a black and white thing.
You make a valid point. I'm probably using the terms soft and hard science nonstandardly. I think my usage does get at the essence of the distinction tho. Keeping with my usage, biology is indeed for a large part a soft science. Heck even physics has a soft side -- e.g., cosmology.
As for your last point, I'd say that religion and soft sciences can be distinguished by their epistemology. Religion relies on faith, while soft sciences depend on empirical evidence and rational inquiry.
I think this is an unfair comparison because religions prescribe ethics, which cannot possibly be supported by empirical evidence. Religion and soft sciences (as per my usage) are similar in that their explanations have to be believed. What they're attempting to explain may be different.
I take the blackpill to be both A and B.
I think this is rare. You likened the blackpill to science, but what scientific discipline counts the outcomes of their experiments or questionnaires among their scope?
 
that's not quite what I was getting at. I'm saying that the blackpill -- from a sociological POV -- exhibits ideological signs.
It does exhibit those signs. But I believe those ideological signs stem from the blackpilled conclusions that are the result of the blackpill knowledge. At its core, the blackpill is a collection of facts, data and explanations—the resultant beliefs, principles or ideologies that may emerge because of exposure to the knowledge are unrelated to the point. To me, the blackpill presents reality as it is, and any ideology or idea that follows is not the blackpill, but rather a way to address the problems within our reality—problems which the blackpill presents factually, and explains the nature of their existence.

I think this is an unfair comparison because religions prescribe ethics, which cannot possibly be supported by empirical evidence. Religion and soft sciences (as per my usage) are similar in that their explanations have to be believed. What they're attempting to explain may be different.
At this point, the discussion seems to be more about semantics. I believe I get what you are saying—the Blackpill "philosophically" could be seen as a set of ideas to be believed in the same way religion could. I can agree with that to a certain degree, but the main distinction is that the Blackpill is grounded in reason and science rather than on faith or spirituality. Its truths are derived from real world observations and data, much like science. And regardless of whether one chooses to "subscribe" to it—it remains the truth.

I think this is rare. You likened the blackpill to science, but what scientific discipline counts the outcomes of their experiments or questionnaires among their scope?
A lot of the sciences do.

For example, Economics often uses experiments and surveys to collect data on market trends, consumer behavior, and the effectiveness of economic policies.

Likewise, Psychology routinely uses surveys and other methods to investigate the ways in which people think, behave, and interact in various situations.

And Sociologists often rely on surveys and observational data collection to understand the dynamics of social life and structure.
 
Last edited:
blackpill is the only truth of human nature and nature
 
A lot of the sciences do.

For example, Economics often uses experiments and surveys to collect data on market trends, consumer behavior, and the effectiveness of economic policies.

Likewise, Psychology routinely uses surveys and other methods to investigate the ways in which people think, behave, and interact in various situations.

And Sociologists often rely on surveys and observational data collection to understand the dynamics of social life and structure.
that Joyce from Ireland prefers potatoes to rice ain't part of any scientific discipline. that's what it means to count data among your discipline. Concluding that potatoes are generally preferred to rice in Ireland is not raw data, it's -- as the verb suggests -- a conclusion. With that in mind let me ask you again, do you really consider data to be part of the blackpill?
It does exhibit those signs. But I believe those ideological signs stem from the blackpilled conclusions that are the result of the blackpill knowledge. At its core, the blackpill is a collection of facts, data and explanations—the resultant beliefs, principles or ideologies that may emerge because of exposure to the knowledge are unrelated to the point. To me, the blackpill presents reality as it is, and any ideology or idea that follows is not the blackpill, but rather a way to address the problems within our reality—problems which the blackpill presents factually, and explains the nature of their existence.
Generally meanings of words are determined by consensus. It's not quite that black and white though, since most people haven't the slightest inkling what, say, mathematics really entails. Be that as it may, I think it's hard to defend the word blackpill is used in accordance with your vision, even by fellow "experts"
 

Similar threads

packardD
Replies
10
Views
807
FreeCipher
FreeCipher
SupremeAutist
Replies
26
Views
1K
Sheogorath
Sheogorath
SuperKanga.Belgrade
Replies
16
Views
225
ItsovERfucks
ItsovERfucks
veryrare
Replies
5
Views
248
Sex-Starved Beast
Sex-Starved Beast

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top