JFL This Article supports self-improvement and denialism of teen love

[MountainGorilla]

Private Site

autisticmercury.com

4Chan, Heidegger, and the Embodiment of Self-Improvement
4channers have the hypertrophied intuition of damaged men: they mix being absolutely retarded on the personal level with sociological takes from the year 3020. They have the keenest of observation powers, but they far exceed their theory.

Let’s discuss the macro in question.

The author has correctly latched onto the difference between people who merely ‘flow’ through life and people who feel the need, and follow through that need in attempting to, explicitly self-improve.

He – and you know damn well it’s a he – is pointing at a real distinction, which tracks a distinction made by Heidegger before him: that between something present-at-hand and being ready-to-hand.

Heidegger, as he was an author, was also an excellent observer. Also, much like today’s 4channers, he was a terminology innovator. Study the following slides explaining this distinction of his, I’ll wait.

Heidegger’s idea is the following: while you use an object, if everything goes right, you’ll forget that “you” are “using” an “object“. There is, during the use, no you, no using, no object. Just doing, just acting, just being.

If something fails, however, maybe because the hammer breaks, maybe because you hammer your finger, you quickly come back to the present. Much like being brought out of a Flow State. Back to perceiving yourself as your self and to perceiving the object that was being used as an object.

That is, this present-at-hand event, this explicit reflective mode is what happens when something goes wrong. Read it again because it’s what I’m trying to get through: the explicit reflective mode is what happens when something goes wrong.

Now, to tie this back to the original image: deliberate self-improvement is definitely both explicit and reflective. Is there something going wrong here that is causing it? Yes. And what is going wrong? What is going wrong is that the self-improver, and that means you, my dear reader, aren’t ready-to-hand to yourself. That is, you are – to yourself – an object. Not unlike the hammer. But worse than the hammer too: because you are broken, to yourself.

And thus, logically, following the same logic, you try to fix yourself the way you’d fix any broken object. But the whole problem, the causa prima of your predicament, is that you treat yourself as an object in the first place and explicit self-improvement only reinforces this view.

Again: the causa prima of your predicament, is that you treat yourself as an object in the first place and explicit self-improvement only reinforces this view

Why? I don’t know. A long time ago something went deeply wrong with your deep models of how to be in the world. Of how to relate to yourself, to others, to reality. You will never just pre-reflectively do the right things the way that the jock in the macro does that would, in a relatively effortless way, get you the things you want.

It’s unlikely that it’s genetics. This is another point of theory failure. Not only that, it’s a point of prioritization failure: what caused it doesn’t matter. The endless pursuit for the actual causa prima, what actually went wrong, who, when, what, where — that’s narcissistic masturbation archeology. It’s only purpose is to keep you distracted from actually enacting something that would cause a change when YouTube, Twitch, and Netflix have run their course. “Guess I should try to figure this out” — guess what, you’re not actually trying. The only thing that matters is that there is a solution and that you know in your heart of hearts what it looks like: you must once again become an embodied being (not object) among other embodied beings. Even if that means the annihilation of your current self. The current arrangement is not sustainable, that’s why you have a death wish.

This is the kind of thing that responds to hundreds of hours of excellent therapy or emotional processing or hardcore meditation.

So, ironically, the great boon of self-improvement communities is the community itself as it force-pushes you to re-embody. But you decided a long time to self-improve by yourself — go alone to go fast, right?


@Cybersex is our hope @Anonymous MG @BabyFuck McGirlsex @BlkPillPres @LittleBoy @Atavistic Autist @B.O.G.A.R.T. @Edmund_Kemper @Incellectual @ryhan @GanyoTribe @IsolationHurts @azathoth1919 @Subhuman Currycel @Transcended Trucel @Quarantined @BenBerger @Benj-amin @NoCopeNoHope @mylifeistrash @ionlycopenow @Jazavac @Cuyen @SlayerSlayer @slimshady @HidekiTojota @tulasdanslos @truthpill @Sparrow's Song @mental_out @Virginp0wers @commander_zoidberg @SuperMario64DS @Opus132 @Wizard32 @Fat Link @Simulacrasimulation @Total Imbecile @FrailPaleStaleMale @ShadowTheEdgehog @Transcended Trucel @Master

I summon thy high-iqcels, thoughts?

 

[Edmund_Kemper]

tbh if we were to say bluepilled shit, i bet IT would be blackpilled

 

[theson]

I notice I am not on the high IQ list of users by some error.

 

[Hate_my_life]

Heidegger’s idea is the following: while you use an object, if everything goes right, you’ll forget that “you” are “using” an “object“. There is, during the use, no you, no using, no object. Just doing, just acting, just being.

If something fails, however, maybe because the hammer breaks, maybe because you hammer your finger, you quickly come back to the present. Much like being brought out of a Flow State. Back to perceiving yourself as your self and to perceiving the object that was being used as an object.

That is, this present-at-hand event, this explicit reflective mode is what happens when something goes wrong. Read it again because it’s what I’m trying to get through: the explicit reflective mode is what happens when something goes wrong.

This is a very nice high IQ take.

 

[MountainGorilla]

"that you are broken"

"Unlikely that it's genetics"

What is this shit ahaha.

They talk about us like we have had this same realisation or mindset since birth. If that's as the case maybe they'd have a point. But like most people who feed us shit, they don't understand that, that is never the case. We all change throughout our lives. The only thing that never does is our genetics, and it's due to that, that nothing ever changes for us. Because society places such a high value on them.

The assumption that we've "never tried" is just a joke. People merely assume we never have because it fits the Stereotype and allows them to use that as an excuse. Plenty of us have put in ample effort. The original image is correct. These things come naturally to some people. Mindset has little to do with it. If we just decided to play sports, we would get laughed at and get picked last.

Yeah its the article is basically saying "don't care about other people, find your own identity" if thats what the article is trying to say when they say "don't see yourself as an object". I guess its supporting joining therapy groups so it forces you to find an identity or some shit like that

 

[theson]

This is a very nice high IQ take.

It is just saying "you take what you have for granted till it's gone".

 

[truthpill]

I can understand the point you are trying to make by stating that self-improvement invokes a sense of fixing or adding to one's self, as one would do so with an object or tool. Therefore self-improvement can be considered a discrete form of objectification. As for self-improvement itself, I do agree with self-improvement as not only can it give you a confidence boost and/or improve your quality of life, but it can also help in terms of climbing the social hierarchy (money, status and attractiveness in SOME cases). However, self improvement won't fix every single problem or bridge every gap in your life. Many things are down to genetics, predetermined circumstances and society's status-quo. That being said. I do think incels should try and improve themselves, not for females. But for themselves as it is better to be an incel who can cope with money (careermaxxing), has a somewhat decent mental image of himself (looksmaxxing) and who can defend himself from normies (gymmaxxing). Rather than be an LDAR neetcel who has nothing. What I'm saying is that it's better to make the most out of the cards you have been dealt.

 

[Hate_my_life]

This is the kind of thing that responds to hundreds of hours of excellent therapy or emotional processing or hardcore meditation.

Therapy? No.

Hardcore meditation possibly.

I'd like to know other people's views (please don't derail this thread), but I believe intrinsically we're "trapped" in what Heidegger would describe as the "present at hand" state.
We've realised our permanent self-defect, thus we shall never enter the "flow state".

I like how the author immediately shy'd away from mentioning genetics because that in turn would imply our genetics barred us from ever entering the flow state, exemplifying the truth of the blackpill.

It is just saying "you take what you have for granted till it's gone".

In a way yeah.

 

[AlexanderTheGreat11]

I wasn't tagged

 

[MountainGorilla]

It is just saying "you take what you have for granted till it's gone".

you summed it up pretty well for an article that uses nothing but word salad and vague words

 

[Wristlet 2]

IQ mogs me

 

[theson]

Self-improvement is a way of offloading society's responsibility for causing you pain onto you. I don't want to sleep with you because you didn't make yourself good enough they tell you. The 'personal responsibility' argument (which compels self-improvement) is also used on many other groups who are considered historically oppressed including women and minoritied. If they admit that the problem is not within yourself then the burden of causing you pain lies on society and that threatens the status quo.

 

[Deleted member 26032]

I notice I am not on the high IQ list of users by some error.

Me too.
How come @MountainGorilla ?

 

[theson]

Me too.
How come @MountainGorilla ?

We are low IQ.

 

[MountainGorilla]

I can understand the point you are trying to make by stating that self-improvement invokes a sense of fixing or adding to one's self, as one would do so with an object or tool. Therefore self-improvement can be considered a discrete form of objectification. As for self-improvement itself, I do agree with self-improvement as not only can it give you a confidence boost and/or improve your quality of life, but it can also help in terms of climbing the social hierarchy (money, status and attractiveness in SOME cases). However, self improvement won't fix every single problem or bridge every gap in your life. Many things are down to genetics, predetermined circumstances and society's status-quo. That being said. I do think incels should try and improve themselves, not for females. But for themselves as it is better to be an incel who can cope with money (careermaxxing), has a somewhat decent mental image of himself (looksmaxxing) and who can defend himself from normies (gymmaxxing). Rather than be an LDAR neetcel who has nothing. What I'm saying is that it's better to make the most out of the cards you have been dealt.

What if some people are happy being a ldar neetcel who has nothing to do? You don't just wake up one day telling yourself, "My ultimate purpose in life is to self-improve and take personal responsibility!"

how do you know those beliefs weren't indoctrinated into you since you were a child?

 

[Quarantined]

I notice I am not on the high IQ list of users by some error.

Ya yet I was

 

[mylifeistrash]

Private Site

autisticmercury.com

It’s unlikely that it’s genetics.

it's all genes and nothing else.

 

[SuperMario64DS]

I'm honored. But despite sounding articulate, I'm fucking retarded.


Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhh..........

Like it's right in some aspects but it's far off the mark in other respects.

First of all,
Of course, you should not lead people onto the fact that you are self-improving (fuck), because that implies, what you need is self-improvement, and therefore, you are flawed / insecure. I haven't personally disclosed to anyone I'm not immediately close with that I'm self-improving. Only anonymously online and with people I am very close with. I have nothing to lose by doing that, unless this gets out who I am. I did try sharing with a girl that I needed a hobby to help me with a work balance, and I regret that.

It does not mean that being in self-improvement program is something you have to let people become aware with.

Problem, tho:

It assumes what success is in very specific parameters.

While "success" is something that is objective, success "essentially" (what it is) is never really fully achieved by people in any way, and impossible to fully achieve as a human being due to the fact that our own perceptions of what isn't "success" is met, in some degree, inevitably. Taking a shit. Gaining weight. Getting into a bad habit. Most people find that disgusting. It's inevitable, however, with people.

What this means is that "success" has a lot of room for subjective interpretations of what levels of "success" mean to people. Is having sex in high school successful? Most people would say yes (unless you are religious, of course). But what if that someone ends up impregnating her, marries her, and works a dead end job till death? ...is that success?

I look at a girl classmate of mine from high school who is early 20s and has three kids, fat, and has a husband working a deadend job. To me, that's not success. But for her, maybe that's success.

A 27 year old naturally handsome but late blooming virgin who never had sex in high school, college, gets out of PhD program in physics, goes out partying, find a lovely girl he takes home, and becomes married to her. Is that success?

A 16 year old perfect chin blonde blue eyed white succulent lips ripped man may fuck every single woman without a single consequence and become a multibillionaire after getting a PhD in music at age 8. Good luck with reaching that. Some people may not even argue that this is success because he didn't do X, Y, or Z.

You have to define success for yourself. True, some aspects you will not be able to be successful at. You were not successful at finding a girl in college. You may not be successful at ever finding a girl. But you can find "success" elsewhere.

Being able to self-improve in any meaningful way is "success" objectively speaking, and you should see yourself setting goals of what "success" means for you and reach that.

Also, he defines "self-improvement" in very specific parameters. He defines it as for people like us. But is getting in shape "self-improvement?" Isn't this blackpill "self-improvement" by the fact he is sharing something "true"? So if I don't ever get into shape, I'm a failure? Isn't he a failure for "self-improving" by sharing "bitter truths?"

If self-improvement was fucking gatekept like this, nobody would be successful in any meaningful way.



OP (of Reddit post) is either an edgy troll like NegativeXP, or a 35 year old carpenter who jacks off to being a jock 19 years ago (which is a failure to someone becoming an engineer, doctor, businessman, etc.). Probably too retarded to realize that a lot of successful people in the world never "went with the societal flow."

Either way, he can go fuck himself. Hope he ropes.


Also yes, being on this forum and revealing who you are to the world is a failure. Being on this forum implies you have issues with women for women.

 

[MountainGorilla]

I'm honored. But despite sounding articulate, I'm fucking retarded.


Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhh..........

Like it's right in some aspects but it's far off the mark in other respects.

First of all,
Of course, you should not lead people onto the fact that you are self-improving (fuck), because that implies, what you need is self-improvement. I haven't personally disclosed to anyone I'm not immediately close with that I'm self-improving. Only anonymously online and with people I am very close with. I have nothing to lose by doing that, unless this gets out who I am. I did try sharing with a girl that I needed a hobby to help me study, and I regret that.

It does not mean that being in self-improvement program is something you have to let people become aware with.

Problem, tho:

It assumes what success is in very specific parameters.

While "success" is something that is objective, success "essentially" (what it is) is never really fully achieved by people in any way, and impossible to fully achieve as a human being due to the fact that our own perceptions of what isn't "success" is met, in some degree, inevitably. Taking a shit. Gaining weight. Getting into a bad habit. Most people find that disgusting. It's inevitable, however, with people.

What this means is that "success" has a lot of room for subjective interpretations of what levels of "success" mean to people. Is having sex in high school successful? Most people would say yes (unless you are religious, of course). But what if that someone ends up impregnating her, marries her, and works a dead end job till death? ...is that success?

I look at a girl classmate of mine from high school who is early 20s and has three kids, fat, and has a husband working a deadend job. To me, that's not success. But for her, maybe that's success.

A 27 year old naturally handsome but late blooming virgin who never had sex in high school, college, gets out of PhD program in physics, goes out partying, find a lovely girl he takes home, and becomes married to her. Is that success?

A 16 year old perfect chin blonde blue eyed white succulent lips ripped man may fuck every single woman without a single consequence and become a multibillionaire after getting a PhD in music at age 8. Good luck with reaching that. Some people may not even argue that this is success because he didn't do X, Y, or Z.

You have to define success for yourself. True, some aspects you will not be able to be successful at. You were not successful at finding a girl in college. You may not be successful at ever finding a girl. But you can find "success" elsewhere.

Being able to self-improve in any meaningful way is "success" objectively speaking, and you should see yourself setting goals of what "success" means for you and reach that.

Also, he defines "self-improvement" in very specific parameters. He defines it as for people like us. But is getting in shape "self-improvement?" Isn't this blackpill "self-improvement" by the fact he is sharing something "true"? So if I don't ever get into shape, I'm a failure? Isn't he a failure for "self-improving" by sharing "bitter truths?"

If self-improvement was fucking gatekept like this, nobody would be successful in any meaningful way.



OP (of Reddit post) is either an edgy troll like NegativeXP, or a 35 year old carpenter who jacks off to being a jock 19 years ago (which is a failure to someone becoming an engineer, doctor, businessman, etc.). Probably too retarded to realize that the most successful people in the world "never went with the societal flow." Either way, he can go fuck himself. Hope he ropes.


Also yes, being on this forum and revealing who you are to the world is a failure.

This is the blackpill in a nutshell.


“Take the universe and grind it down to the finest powder and sieve it through the finest sieve and then show me one atom of justice, one molecule of mercy. and yet... and yet you act as if there is some ideal order in the world, as if there is some... some rightness in the universe by which it may be judged.”

― Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

 

[truthpill]

What if some people are happy being a ldar neetcel who has nothing to do? You don't just wake up one day telling yourself, "My ultimate purpose in life is to self-improve and take personal responsibility!"

how do you know those beliefs weren't indoctrinated into you since you were a child?

Well if some people are happy being LDAR neetcels then that's great for them. I personally can't live like that, being genetic shit doesn't mean I can't have goals. Inceldom is one thing, choosing to be a deadbeat bum whos jerks off all day is another. I respect neetcels, but I don't share their ideology.

 

[SuperMario64DS]

This is the blackpill in a nutshell.


“Take the universe and grind it down to the finest powder and sieve it through the finest sieve and then show me one atom of justice, one molecule of mercy. and yet... and yet you act as if there is some ideal order in the world, as if there is some... some rightness in the universe by which it may be judged.”

― Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

I don't know if you are agreeing with me or not. But I agree.

Well if some people are happy being LDAR neetcels then that's great for them. I personally can't live like that, being genetic shit doesn't mean I can't have goals. Inceldom is one thing, choosing to be a deadbeat bum whos jerks off all day is another. I respect neetcels, but I don't share their ideology.

+++

 

[MountainGorilla]

I don't know if you are agreeing with me or not. But I agree.

I was just adding on to what you said, I 100% agree with your post.

 

[SuperMario64DS]

I was just adding on to what you said, I 100% agree with your post.

cool. I need people to jack off to my thoughts (my thoughts, not my thots, I have no thots, only thoughts)

IMO realizing this is success. You aren't constrained by other people's definition of success and won't go down paths you don't want to go down, but will because you follow other people's definition of success.

Keep setting higher and higher definitions of success for yourself until you can't anymore, and be content with that success.

 

[ionlycopenow]

"that you are broken"

"Unlikely that it's genetics"

What is this shit ahaha.

They talk about us like we have had this same realisation or mindset since birth. If that's as the case maybe they'd have a point. But like most people who feed us shit, they don't understand that, that is never the case. We all change throughout our lives. The only thing that never does is our genetics, and it's due to that, that nothing ever changes for us. Because society places such a high value on them.

The assumption that we've "never tried" is just a joke. People merely assume we never have because it fits the Stereotype and allows them to use that as an excuse. Plenty of us have put in ample effort. The original image is correct. These things come naturally to some people. Mindset has little to do with it. If we just decided to play sports, we would get laughed at and get picked last.

I think the point it's trying to make is basically reaffirming what the original post said, that "self improvement" is a never ending cycle because you see yourself as a "fixer upper" rather than your own person, and being stuck in that mindset never actually leads to any fulfillment.

Trouble is, once you're in that point of realizing there IS something broken with you, whether or not you view yourself as an object or a being doesn't matter. You've already acknowledged you have shit genes, and now you only know what's been causing you so much trouble, and it's not something you can change or fix.

Keywords there are "if everything goes right", (if you have good genes). He basically shat on his own article in the first few sentences.

 

[Joelossus]

Wow, great post my friend. It's actually the first post in a while which i added to my bookmarks. Unfortunately i'm too low iq to contribute anything of value to this discussion. But still thanks for posting this, i missed threads like this.

 

[SuperMario64DS]

I think the point it's trying to make is basically reaffirming what the original post said, that "self improvement" is a never ending cycle because you see yourself as a "fixer upper" rather than your own person, and being stuck in that mindset never actually leads to any fulfillment.

Trouble is, once you're in that point of realizing there IS something broken with you, whether or not you view yourself as an object or a being doesn't matter. You've already acknowledged you have shit genes, and now you only know what's been causing you so much trouble, and it's not something you can change or fix.

But every single person, even if it "comes naturally," self-improves. And there are few people that don't have an ideal which is higher than them which they will never reach.

A bodylifter has Scharzneggar. A Christian has Jesus. A rapper has 2PAC. An alt-rock lead singer has Chester from Lincoln Park.

If it's the logic of having an ideal which motivates you to do something, no shit you will never reach that ideal. No bodylifter thinks they will get to Arnold Scharzneggar's level unless they feel they no longer need to attend the Arnold. That's why you have to keep adjusting the ideal till you are maximized to the best person you can be.

No Christian is ever going to be Jesus. But Jesus is the ideal for the Christian.

 

[Opus132]

I stopped caring at the "terminology innovator", which is just a comically unsubtle way of saying: warning, sophistry found ahead.

Name dropping Heidegger in the title was a huge red flag the article was going to be the usual pretentious nonsense that actually ends up saying nothing of value and never prove any of the premises involved in this argument (the real ones, none of the nonsensical stuff the author is talking about) any further than they were initially.

Basically, the article can be summed up like this:

Pretentious nonsense pretentious nonsense pretentious nonsense random claim that was never proven inserted here (ex: it's unlikely that it is genetics).

See, all of the stuff about Heidegger is a big red herring, the real "crux" of the article is those unproven claims that seem to come out of nowhere and are not substantiated by what came before in the slightest.

People need to understand one thing, this is a battle between a realist position and a nominalist point of view which informs almost everything the moderns say, whether they are aware of it or not:



Everything else is basically nonsense, and the answer to the problem posed by the article is simply that modern society is trying to impose a one size fit all standard that simply isn't meant for everybody. The fallacy of self-help is precisely this, that you cannot "will" yourself into becoming something you are not.

At the same time, i disagree with the 4chan guy as well, because he too believes that the fault lies with the individual who is unable to fit in the society, and not with the society in question being made to exclude anyone who doesn't fit into its model for success. For while the law of the jungle does have its demands, the worthlessness of many of the people that are left out by modern society is grossly overstated. Quoting Guenon here as this passage is very pertinent to my point:

https://dinghal.com/bibliotheek/The_Crisis_of_the_Modern_World.pdf

It is not enough however to withhold approval of modern inventions on the grounds of their dangerous side alone; there is more than this to the affair. One hears of the 'benefits' claimed for what men have agreed to call 'progress', and that one might even consent so to call, provided one take care to make it clear that there is no question of any but a purely material progress; but are not these 'benefits', of which people are so proud, very largely illusory? Our contemporaries claim they increase their 'welfare' by this means; in our opinion, the end they set themselves, even if it were really attained, is hardly worth the expenditure of so much effort; but what is more, it seems a very debatable question whether they do attain it. In the first place, the fact should be taken into account that not all men have the same tastes or the same needs, and that there are still some who would wish to avoid modern commotion and the craving ... for speed, but who can no longer do so. Could anyone presume to maintain that it is a 'benefit' to these people to have thrust on them what is most contrary to their nature? It will be said in reply that there are few such men today, and this is considered a justification for treating them as a negligible quantity; in this, as in the field of politics, the majority arrogates to itself the right to crush minorities, which, in its eyes, evidently have no right to exist, since their very existence defies the egalitarian mania for uniformity. But if the whole of mankind be taken into consideration, instead of merely the Western world, the question bears a different aspect: the majority we have just spoken of then becomes a minority. A different argument is therefore used in this case, and by a strange contradiction it is in the name of their 'superiority' that these 'egalitarians' seek to impose their civilization on the rest of the world, and that they bring trouble to people who have never asked them for anything; and, since this 'superiority' exists only from the material point of view, it is quite natural that the most brutal means are used to assert it. Let there be no confusion on this point: if the general public accepts the pretext of 'civilization' in all good faith, there are those for whom it is no more than mere moralistic hypocrisy, serving as a mask for designs of conquest or economic ambitions. It is really an extraordinary epoch in which so many men can be made to believe that a people is being given happiness by being reduced to subjection, by being robbed of all that is most precious to it, that is to say of its own civilization, by being forced to adopt manners and institutions that were made for a different race, and by being constrained to the most distasteful kinds of work, in order to make it acquire things for which it has not the slightest use. For that is what is taking place: the modern West cannot tolerate that men should prefer to work less and be content to live on little; as it is only quantity that counts, and as everything that escapes the senses is held to be nonexistent, it is taken for granted that anyone who is not in a state of agitation and who does not produce much in a material way must be 'lazy'. In evidence of this and without speaking of the opinions commonly expressed about Eastern peoples, it is enough to note how the contemplative orders are viewed, even in circles that consider themselves religious. In such a world, there is no longer any place for intelligence, or anything else that is purely inward, for these are things that can neither be seen nor touched, that can neither be counted nor weighed; there is a place only for outward action in all its forms, even those that are the most completely meaningless. For this reason it should not be a matter for surprise that the Anglo-Saxon mania for sport gains ground day by day: the ideal of the modern world is the 'human animal' who has developed his muscular strength to the highest pitch; its heroes are athletes, even though they be mere brutes; it is they who awaken popular enthusiasm, and it is their exploits that ,command the passionate interest of the crowd. A world in which such things are seen has indeed sunk low and seems near its end.

In the modern world, you succeed only if you the inclination to keep up with the frenetic pace of modern society, the competitive nature of modern economic models, and the desire to acquire material possessions which by themselves are actually kinda worthless. If you are a contemplative, an introvert, someone who prefers to gaze and ponder rather than work and produce, is it really your genetic unfitness that is the problem, or is society that has declared it has no place for people like you, and that you must either change or perish? And wouldn't it make sense for anyone who believes this society to be the superior one, as progressives do, to cling to this notion that people CAN change if they want to, rather than admit that the world they have created is oppressive to many people who never asked for any of the so called "advantages" of the modern world and don't have the inclination to fit in this crushing industrial/economic complex that is require to produce and maintain all this progress?

 

[Total Imbecile]

Not high IQ, had to spend 10 minutes reading the article to actually understand it. Either way

His observations are correct but the conclusion is just COPE. In 2020 were all just objects like cars that women shop for.


Also that chan image

 

[Fat Link]

The author has correctly latched onto the difference between people who merely ‘flow’ through life and people who feel the need, and follow through that need in attempting to, explicitly self-improve.

While I would never argue against channers generally being more intelligent and perceptive than the rest of society ie the NPC's, channers unfortunately almost ALL across the board lack a kind of restraint that one of my ideological racial heroes the late Dr. William Pierce once talked about when he told us his listeners about certain profound truths in life.

In other words Dr. Pierce explained to us that when attempting to educate certain individuals on certain deep subject matter they had questions about he would provide them an answer to their question and the individual immediately reacted to the answer and their reaction was the wrong reaction ie in other words they did not properly understand the knowledge Dr. Pierce was trying to convey to them.

Now why was that you might wonder?

It is because certain information, certain profound truths believe it or not require a certain amount of how do I put this..."processing time" or another way of putting it is "quiet contemplation".

Basically some answers to your questions really need you to do a great deal of soul searching and literally think over the answer that you are given for a couple of weeks or even months time to come to a proper conclusion about the information you have been given.

Well channers again utterly lack this ability as they are natural reactionaries and well despite their often high intelligence and highly perceptive natures again lack restraint as well in many cases maturity emotional and otherwise and this prevents them from seeing the ENTIRE big picture about various subjects that they only think that they've "got it all figured out" about.

Now with that long winded pre-amble behind me...

I'm going to go ahead and strongly disagree with the channer's post that you posted that only seems logical and sound on it's surface. In other words to a fellow channer ie a reactionary type it sounds perfectly valid.

Well...

It is not.

And I'll explain why using the analogy of Theon talking to Jon Snow in this video excerpt and also for the example we can imagine Theon as the "incel" stand in figure and Jon as the "Chad" stand in figure in the equation.



The pertinent thing to bring up about their discussion is that incel Theon only "assumes" that Chad Jon Snow has had it "figured out" his entire life in regards to "making the right decisions" from a moral perspective, yet Jon wisely lets him in on a little secret and that of course is as he tells him: "It may look like it (that Jon makes the right decisions all of the time) from the outside, but I promise you its not".

Jon isn't just placating Theon here and trying to make him "feel better" as a suffering incel. Jon is telling Theon the truth about Jon's own Chad existance and making an admission about his own personal failures even while being a Chad.

So to sum up, the point is...about ALL situations "there is more than meets the eye" to use the tired but true old and wise cliche'd term.

Also the Jon Snow character works on even more levels to refute the particular channer's post that you posted in that even though Jon was a Chad it took a very long time for him to find a woman who was attracted to him and they fall in love with eachother and they lose their virginity to eachother etc.

It is explained in Jon's story arc to his best friend Sam that while Sam may resent Jon for being a Chad despite their being such good friends Jon explains to Sam that he resented his brother Rob for being essentially a greater Chad than him and alpha MOGGing him at basically every conceivable opportunity even though Rob loved and respected Jon and literally was not working actively to undermine him.

The chan author also forgets/omits the struggle aspect of life ie life's evolutionary struggle.

Everyone everywhere at all times is engaged in a struggle for the fruits of life so long as they're alive.

Even we incels/Wizards that have given up on sex/relationships are still a part of this struggle as we even in our LDAR ways still seek to maximize our pleasure/comfort and mitigate our pain/discomfort etc.

Every time we put the necessary amounts of food or drink into our mouths and subsequent bodies to go on living is our continued struggle against the natural forces of death and entropy.

Also what else that refutes this channer's reactionary/ignorant post is that if someone or many someone's have/had a self improvement nature that ended up bringing about the conditions that caused them to finally ascend than perhaps they were not actually a "genetic dead end" after all since it was their very mind that motivated them to actions that produced said ascension therefore meaning on some level they must of had "good genetics" that provided them with a "can do attitude" having mind.

So if certain incels/wizards can pull themselves off of the societal shit heap and actually ascend through self improvement methods and their minds motivate them to do so and they do in fact do so then they have at least revealed that on SOME level they have good genetics after all and thus once again refute this guy's post.

No, they still are not "Chad's" of course but a Chadlite or a normie that can acquire females that want to be with them for pairbonding/sex/romantic love purposes at least then indicate good genetic stock after all even though their journey was POSSIBLY much more brutal than that of the commonly observed and alleged "natural Chad".

I say "alleged" because even though we can all observe men we believe to be ultra successful mega Chads who "got it" the "it" in question being sex/love/poontang/etc, etc effortlessley we don't REALLY know them or their own personal struggles at the end of the day.

Just as Theon did not know that Jon Snow his own version of a perceived mega Chad who just had all the right answers and made all the right decisions effortlessly really didn't and that was by Jon's own mouth telling him this, no speculation needed.

 

[Chileancel]

No amount of self-improvement will defeat the female lizard brain about the minimum amount of symmetry needed to pass your genes.

 

[Sparrow's Song]

The more self improvement you require, the more subhuman your face was when you discovered that you needed self improvement to begin with. The problem with self improvement is the kid that we need is basically like slaves in Alabama in the 1830's trying to buy their freedom before their bodies were too old and worn down to even work the fields anymore anyway. The "Self Improvement" meme than cucks and normtards spew is convenient for the modern day biological slavery men face, it's basically like telling builders who need to repair a dangerous bridge that all it needs are some new signs and lights (clothes, "personality", gym) when the structure itself is what's fucked up (your facial bones structure).

 

[BabyFuck McGirlsex]

Private Site

autisticmercury.com

4Chan, Heidegger, and the Embodiment of Self-Improvement
4channers have the hypertrophied intuition of damaged men: they mix being absolutely retarded on the personal level with sociological takes from the year 3020. They have the keenest of observation powers, but they far exceed their theory.

Let’s discuss the macro in question.

The author has correctly latched onto the difference between people who merely ‘flow’ through life and people who feel the need, and follow through that need in attempting to, explicitly self-improve.

He – and you know damn well it’s a he – is pointing at a real distinction, which tracks a distinction made by Heidegger before him: that between something present-at-hand and being ready-to-hand.

Heidegger, as he was an author, was also an excellent observer. Also, much like today’s 4channers, he was a terminology innovator. Study the following slides explaining this distinction of his, I’ll wait.

Heidegger’s idea is the following: while you use an object, if everything goes right, you’ll forget that “you” are “using” an “object“. There is, during the use, no you, no using, no object. Just doing, just acting, just being.

If something fails, however, maybe because the hammer breaks, maybe because you hammer your finger, you quickly come back to the present. Much like being brought out of a Flow State. Back to perceiving yourself as your self and to perceiving the object that was being used as an object.

That is, this present-at-hand event, this explicit reflective mode is what happens when something goes wrong. Read it again because it’s what I’m trying to get through: the explicit reflective mode is what happens when something goes wrong.

Now, to tie this back to the original image: deliberate self-improvement is definitely both explicit and reflective. Is there something going wrong here that is causing it? Yes. And what is going wrong? What is going wrong is that the self-improver, and that means you, my dear reader, aren’t ready-to-hand to yourself. That is, you are – to yourself – an object. Not unlike the hammer. But worse than the hammer too: because you are broken, to yourself.

And thus, logically, following the same logic, you try to fix yourself the way you’d fix any broken object. But the whole problem, the causa prima of your predicament, is that you treat yourself as an object in the first place and explicit self-improvement only reinforces this view.

Again: the causa prima of your predicament, is that you treat yourself as an object in the first place and explicit self-improvement only reinforces this view

Why? I don’t know. A long time ago something went deeply wrong with your deep models of how to be in the world. Of how to relate to yourself, to others, to reality. You will never just pre-reflectively do the right things the way that the jock in the macro does that would, in a relatively effortless way, get you the things you want.

It’s unlikely that it’s genetics. This is another point of theory failure. Not only that, it’s a point of prioritization failure: what caused it doesn’t matter. The endless pursuit for the actual causa prima, what actually went wrong, who, when, what, where — that’s narcissistic masturbation archeology. It’s only purpose is to keep you distracted from actually enacting something that would cause a change when YouTube, Twitch, and Netflix have run their course. “Guess I should try to figure this out” — guess what, you’re not actually trying. The only thing that matters is that there is a solution and that you know in your heart of hearts what it looks like: you must once again become an embodied being (not object) among other embodied beings. Even if that means the annihilation of your current self. The current arrangement is not sustainable, that’s why you have a death wish.

This is the kind of thing that responds to hundreds of hours of excellent therapy or emotional processing or hardcore meditation.

So, ironically, the great boon of self-improvement communities is the community itself as it force-pushes you to re-embody. But you decided a long time to self-improve by yourself — go alone to go fast, right?


@Cybersex is our hope @Anonymous MG @BabyFuck McGirlsex @BlkPillPres @LittleBoy @Atavistic Autist @B.O.G.A.R.T. @Edmund_Kemper @Incellectual @ryhan @GanyoTribe @IsolationHurts @azathoth1919 @Subhuman Currycel @Transcended Trucel @Quarantined @BenBerger @Benj-amin @NoCopeNoHope @mylifeistrash @ionlycopenow @Jazavac @Cuyen @SlayerSlayer @slimshady @HidekiTojota @tulasdanslos @truthpill @Sparrow's Song @mental_out @Virginp0wers @commander_zoidberg @SuperMario64DS @Opus132 @Wizard32 @Fat Link @Simulacrasimulation @Total Imbecile @FrailPaleStaleMale @ShadowTheEdgehog @Transcended Trucel @Master

I summon thy high-iqcels, thoughts?

Based and High effort thread

 

[Deleted member 1983]

The harder you try for something the less likely it is to happen, this is why high tier normies and chads dont understand the plight of the incel. They have never had to " try " and relationships/female affection come normally to them. This is also a factor in why normies often take relationships and female attention for granted and cannot seem to fathom why an incel has trouble acquiring these things.

 

[Cuyen]

tbh if we were to say bluepilled shit, i bet IT would be blackpilled

 

[slimshady]

What is this article trying to say? If I am correct about what it is trying to say then I think that this article is lame. Self improvement is good. We treat ourselves like a object because the Society treats us like a object. Not only us, every human being for the system is a object. A Man is not only himself. He is what the people make him. Donald Trump is not President because he is President. If suddenlky tommorow every one decides that Donald is not the president then he is no longer a president.

The problem with Incels is that most of them have lost hope. Even if they self improve they will not get the recognition what others get. The main goal of self improvement is to lead a good life. Leading a good life requires the acknowledgement of you by the Society. If an Incel becomes the World's best footballer by training continously, it is of no use if the society doesn't recognize him as the GOAT of football. This is the problem with many incels. Even if the self improve, most Chads and foids don't want to accept that they are good or better than them.

Yes Self improvement is always good. I also try to self improve everyday. But those Incels who have lost hope, I don't blame them. I think after a certain age it is worthless. Until that age I think we all should try to achieve. Yes maybe it is not about genes. I see many of them blaming their genes. But the problem for many of us wouldn't exist if the foids weren't such whores or the Chads and normies at least gave us basic respect. So the main problem is the people itself. The Structure needs to be broken and replaced. Then the problem is solved. Not the symptoms but the cause is what needs to be eradicated. The normies won't get it because for them they can't see the roots, they can only see some rotting leaves.

 

[tulasdanslos]

The problem with this article is that women treat all males as objects anyway. Think of Chad that just lost his mother and goes telling it to his gf while being sad. The foid will be disgusted and immediately search for the emotionless man archetype behind his back. Because of this, self improvement is recommended since the objectification of your body will do more good than bad.

Btw you flatter me, OP, I'm a fucking moron. It took me a long time to arrange the thoughts in my head and convert them into post form.

 

[BITG]

No amount of self-improvement will defeat the female lizard brain about the minimum amount of symmetry needed to pass your genes.

 

[Deleted member 14577]

lol at thinking i'm high iq tbh. he could have said all he had to say without going on a tangent about Heidegger but whatever. he's basically saying that it's ok to feel a need to self-improve and act on it, which is true. there is a lot of things someone can self-improve in and it can be a good cope, but most of those things aren't useful irl unless you are in like the 95th percentile. you can even work out your social skills to an extent like a muscle, but if you're autistic or not developed properly because of a shitty childhood, it's always going to be visible and normies will always have a disdain for you which will only push you back into ldaring. sure, it's possible to work against that so there's no reason not to try but most people who write posts like that on 4chan have probably tried and failed miserably. there's some very accomplished disadvantaged boyos throughout history but for every one that makes it, there's thousands who have failed.

 

[MountainGorilla]

I stopped caring at the "terminology innovator", which is just a comically unsubtle way of saying: warning, sophistry found ahead.

Name dropping Heidegger in the title was a huge red flag the article was going to be the usual pretentious nonsense that actually ends up saying nothing of value and never prove any of the premises involved in this argument (the real ones, none of the nonsensical stuff the author is talking about) any further than they were initially.

Basically, the article can be summed up like this:

Pretentious nonsense pretentious nonsense pretentious nonsense random claim that was never proven inserted here (ex: it's unlikely that it is genetics).

See, all of the stuff about Heidegger is a big red herring, the real "crux" of the article is those unproven claims that seem to come out of nowhere and are not substantiated by what came before in the slightest.

People need to understand one thing, this is a battle between a realist position and a nominalist point of view which informs almost everything the moderns say, whether they are aware of it or not:



Everything else is basically nonsense, and the answer to the problem posed by the article is simply that modern society is trying to impose a one size fit all standard that simply isn't meant for everybody. The fallacy of self-help is precisely this, that you cannot "will" yourself into becoming something you are not.

At the same time, i disagree with the 4chan guy as well, because he too believes that the fault lies with the individual who is unable to fit in the society, and not with the society in question being made to exclude anyone who doesn't fit into its model for success. For while the law of the jungle does have its demands, the worthlessness of many of the people that are left out by modern society is grossly overstated. Quoting Guenon here as this passage is very pertinent to my point:

https://dinghal.com/bibliotheek/The_Crisis_of_the_Modern_World.pdf

In the modern world, you succeed only if you the inclination to keep up with the frenetic pace of modern society, the competitive nature of modern economic models, and the desire to acquire material possessions which by themselves are actually kinda worthless. If you are a contemplative, an introvert, someone who prefers to gaze and ponder rather than work and produce, is it really your genetic unfitness that is the problem, or is society that has declared it has no place for people like you, and that you must either change or perish? And wouldn't it make sense for anyone who believes this society to be the superior one, as progressives do, to cling to this notion that people CAN change if they want to, rather than admit that the world they have created is oppressive to many people who never asked for any of the so called "advantages" of the modern world and don't have the inclination to fit in this crushing industrial/economic complex that is require to produce and maintain all this progress?

do you have more reading material similar to how society poorly treats men in a style like this?

 

[Opus132]

do you have more reading material similar to how society poorly treats men in a style like this?

Not really, mostly because the books i read don't deal with this problem per-se, the issue is just a consequence of other, larger problems plaguing society as a whole.

For instance, one of the reasons everything is so "extreme" today that the loss of the transcendent plunged most people towards an insatiable craving for the infinite in places where the infinite cannot be found, I.E., relative existence. We live in a world of extremes, and this lecture does a good job explaining the issue:



And this problem affects even the sexual market, as even Chad cannot be satisfied with one woman, he has to have more. Relative existence becomes like a drug, because satisfaction in relative things is temporary and you constantly end up wanting more and more, often pushing people to more extreme and perverse directions.

So basically, everybody in the modern world is coping. Even Chad and Stacy are coping with one another, and it's not enough for them because the world of perishable and ephemeral things is limited by it's very nature.

BTW, it is because relative existence is perishable that i don't buy into this "self help" idea, because in this world things don't get better, they get worse over time. The only thing you can work on is the relinquishing of your ego to acquire higher degrees of a consciousness that is less and less bound to relative existence. That's about it "improving" yourself in any other sense is an up hill battle. Even world renowned athletes, who train themselves all their lives end up losing everything, sometimes as early as their late 20s. Things are just meant to die in this world the only real "progress" you can make is anything pertaining to a more permanent reality.

 

[Cybersex is our hope]

The author has correctly latched onto the difference between people who merely ‘flow’ through life and people who feel the need, and follow through that need in attempting to, explicitly self-improve

More and more men are self conscious and can't flow through life. More and more men have a broken hammer in their hands.
The difference between the pragmatic-social feminine and the analytical-idealistic masculine has never been bigger. This Is why I'm 100% convinced I'll never Be able to pair bond with a NT foid. Either she rejects me because of NTpill or even if she starts a relationship with me it will Be totally impossible to Me to vibrate to her same level of sociality-intuition-social-integration

4channers have the hypertrophied intuition of damaged men: they mix being absolutely retarded on the personal level with sociological takes from the year 3020. They have the keenest of observation powers, but they far exceed their theory.

It's idealistic abstract analysis more than intuition.
I agree. We push the knowledge about the World and foids too far and we come up we the only possible solutions that are either still impossible or would be opposed by the majority of men: transhumanism or hard patriarchy.
Our solutions and our ideas don't match with real possibilities of our society

 

[B.O.G.A.R.T.]

Now, to tie this back to the original image: deliberate self-improvement is definitely both explicit and reflective. Is there something going wrong here that is causing it? Yes. And what is going wrong? What is going wrong is that the self-improver, and that means you, my dear reader, aren’t ready-to-hand to yourself. That is, you are – to yourself – an object. Not unlike the hammer. But worse than the hammer too: because you are broken, to yourself.

And thus, logically, following the same logic, you try to fix yourself the way you’d fix any broken object. But the whole problem, the causa prima of your predicament, is that you treat yourself as an object in the first place and explicit self-improvement only reinforces this view.

Again: the causa prima of your predicament, is that you treat yourself as an object in the first place and explicit self-improvement only reinforces this view

Treating the self as an object is the first step towards liberation -- you acknowledge your castrated dimension. When Edward Norton starts beating the living shit out of himself in front of his boss he isn't simply being sadomasochistic, his fist is now an separate object directing violence against that broken part of himself which attaches him to the mundane world of beta 9-5'ers. Same with the no-fap movement, liberals fear them for simply refusing to coom.

 

[Cybersex is our hope]

Think of Chad that just lost his mother and goes telling it to his gf while being sad.

Yes. Foids don't see any intrinsic value even in chads