Red Pill Logic: Basic Premises – Biology Part 2

In Part 1 of this series I outlined some of the major aspects of biology and evolutionary theory that impact our present sexual market. The Red Pill Praxeology [1] is the study of human action and conduct, and in order to do this, a requirement is a foundation. An approach frequently utilized by Enlightenment philosophers was to view humans as non-constrained by human-created influences. For instance, when one formulated natural law [2] one attempted to formulate a law determined from nature, which is universal and exists independently of the positive law of a given state, political order, legislature or society at large. Positive law being the human-made laws that oblige or specify an action, and describes the establishment of specific rights for an individual or group.

In a coming essay I’m going to talk about culture and social mechanisms and their effects on an aggregate level, however for this post the goal is to continue to describe the biological framework that serves as a foundation for the red pill praxeology, but to tie the biological principles in the first essay together with red pill theory. This is done through utilizing the literature established in the first essay, expanding this into a short theoretical framework, followed by an exercise in the hypotheses that serve as part of it’s ongoing development. Continue reading

Advertisements

Red Pill Logic: Basic Premises – Biology Part 1

I’m happy to concede that we can include many fields as areas of interest and as foundations for red pill theory, such as sociology, anthropology and psychology, but before we had the brains to form societies, a history and a psychology, we were animals in nature like other animals in nature. A preference of mine is to go as far back as possible to achieve a view from as early in a process as possible as this tends to offer a less watered-down view. In a somewhat flippant formulation one could argue that sociology is just the study of applied psychology in groups, and that psychology is merely the study of practical biology among individuals.

Thus the first field of study was biology. Cultures, societies and large parts of psychology can be influenced in very short periods of time, just look at the gargantuan changes we have seen in our societies, cultures and in our mindset since the early 1900s. In the time-span of evolution by natural selection however, we are merely a second on a history that is millions of years long. Biologists differ a bit on how old our specific branch on the tree of great apes is, but they estimate between 100.000 and 200.000 years. Our ancestors prior to this developed bipedal locomotion, larger brains, reduced sexual dimorphism, they got opposing thumbs and lost most of their body hair. Thus, the premise is that while our cultures, our societies, our families and out environment has changed substantially in the past 5000 – 10000 years, will not have changed much in that period.

The major barrier that I’ve found in people for understanding the concepts that I’m going to cover in this essay is time-perspective, to most humans 5 – 10 years is a long time, while for natural selection it’s a second. This is the same reason that people have issues with understanding compound interest and time or the same reason that they expect to put on 10 lbs of lean muscle mass after 2 workouts.

Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Beyond Red and Blue Pills

Lately it seems that there is some discussion regarding when to move on from the red pill. As someone who found the manosphere quite early, was a part of it for a while, left and then came back I found myself thinking about this idea. There is no doubt that everything we encounter in life is either a permanent fixture or a transitory element, meaning that some things stick with us for life, other things are part of our life for a while and are then left behind. To use weight training as an example, if you build your body over time, then you can maintain it with much less effort than it took to build. Yet if you completely neglect it, it will slowly crumble over time. This is similar with most skills, if they are not used, then they atrophy over time until we find ourselves not having the skills at all. Depending on the skill and the length of the atrophy period, one may be able to re-learn the skill rather quickly, or it may take just as long as the initial learning period.

This lead to the question, if a man internalizes red pill teachings will they remain with him in sufficient strength to avoid the very pitfalls that lead him to the manosphere in the first place? One must keep in mind that most men arrive at this corner of the internet because they have problems they need to solve, the problems are many and diverse, what they have in common is intersexual dynamics. Whether a man is attempting to figure out why his wife of 10 or more years left him for a guy she met a few weeks ago, why he is in a 5 year dry-spell, or why he is living in a dead-bedroom situation the manosphere can offer probable diagnosis and potential cures. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Superficial Glances

A couple of days ago on twitter I dropped the tweet “Imagine the writings of a 150 IQ mind, interpreted by a 125 IQ mind, and written for 100 IQ minds, retold by a 100 IQ mind to another.” This tweet was inspired by an internal debate I’ve been having as a result of observing the reactions to some of the recent additions to sphere knowledge and philosophy. When one writes a text one does so in part based on ones own subjective knowledge base, understanding and perspectives, which means that even when writing based on empiricism or by constructing a theoretical framework based on the work of others, one inevitably fuses the mind-independent facets of the work with the subjective aspects of the work.

For instance, when I write an article based on the concepts of supply and demand, part of the article will be based on the accepted academic concepts of supply and demand, however the article will also, in part reflect my understanding of the concepts, interpretation of the concepts and the strictness with which I apply them. Gendernomics draws on accepted concepts and theoretical frameworks from economics, yet in order to apply them I do need to abstract these concepts to a level or two above their application in economics in order to then re-apply them to intersexual dynamics. In doing so the degree of objectivity declines, and subjectivity increases, however I always make it a goal when writing such essays to minimize the level of subjective liberty I grant myself. This is done in order to ensure that a reader who elects to read economic theory after reading Gendernomics will not have been overly influenced by my subjective mind, and thus find that the concepts he then learns are alien to him.

A second motivation is that many people never get around to reading the primary sources, they rely on secondary and tertiary sources, at which point the original idea has been infused with additional data through multiple interpretations, perspectives, biases and levels of understanding. For instance, when I read Nietzsche, I do so in English, however it was originally written in German, thus the interpretation of meaning by the translator will have affected the text. To see this effect, look no further than the many different versions of the Bible that exist on the market, all share the same outline for the most part, but individual sentences and verses differ. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Blue Pill Axioms

I recently had a conversation with Rollo of The Rational Male. Rollo is somewhat unique in that he is one of the few manosphere authors who have actually touched on the topic of unstated axioms and their consequences when applied to the interpretation of the sexual market place. Most frequently he will refer to this as the error of egalitarian equalism, which is a contraction of two elements.

A) Egalitarianism meaning that both men and women are considered equal in their worth as human beings.

B) That there are no biological differences between the sexes and that any difference results from social influence.

The former would be the Enlightenment interpretation of egalitarianism, that form the foundation of the statement, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” from the Declaration of Independence, where one must interpret the meaning of the statement, in context of commoners that had lived in societies where rights and duties were dependent upon your social rank at birth, as “Nobody is born with more or less rights, duties or worth as a human being than anyone else”.

The Second would be the belief based in the Tabula Rasa that there are no meaningful psychological or behavioral differences based in biological evolution among the sexes or other characteristics, and that all differences that do manifest are a result of social influence. From this it follows that men and women think, reason, and value the same information, that they make decisions the same way, and that any representation within a field of endeavor other than the demographic one is  the result of discrimination in some form.

In this case, “egalitarian equalism” is an axiom that has formed, and still forms part of the foundation upon which analysis of intersexual and intra-sexual dynamics is based.

In classic philosophy an axiom is a statement that that is so evident and well established that it is accepted without controversy or question. These come in two varieties, stated and unstated. For instance in mathematics the results of elementary arithmetic are considered unstated axioms, meaning that one does not need to state these explicitly when making an argument. Stated axioms on the other hand are those that are made explicitly clear, when making an argument. For instance, if I begin an argument with “For the purpose of this argument I will consider [insert statement/fact/statistic as being representative, accurate and true] I’m stating a premise that will be utilized within the logical framework of the argument.

The former often takes place where a field or a discussion has statements, facts or otherwise that are so fundamental that only extremely pedantic people may challenge them. The latter is often necessary when making an argument on principle or where there are statements that may be challenged. In order to avoid these protests and make an “If it is so, then it follows” style argument, one states that “for the purpose of this argument, this axiom is considered to be true“.

The Red and Blue Pill are both interpretations of observed reality. In the case of both framework, persons have observed an event or multiple events, and have formed arguments and conclusions around those events. For instance, a man may make an observation that the 437 point checklist a woman lists on her eharmony profile, is only applicable to a certain category of men based on the woman’s history of dating, mating, and associating with men who do not fulfill the criteria on the list. Furthermore, he may add inductively, that if she has such a checklist and it applies only to a subset of men, she must also have a list of sorts for the remaining subsets of men. After all, if every man is considered a potential intimate partner for a woman, and the 437 bullet point checklist is only applied to 80% of men, then there are really only two options:

A) The remaining 20% of men are not considered intimate partner prospects

B) The remaining 20% of men are evaluated using a second list

If he adds to this the observation that the 20% group appear to jump through less hoops, can escalate the relationship faster and generally appear to get better treatment, then attempting to decipher the items on this second list, and utilizing his knowledge would gain him benefits in the sexual market place. The Blue Pill Analysis of the same situation would yield a much different result, as the 437 point checklist is viewed as being true, while the remaining 20% of men to which it does not apply are considered mistakes the woman must make in order for her to learn that she should stick with her list. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Beginning the Journey

The red pill logic series is where I tend to outline those thoughts I have about intersexual dynamics and various related topics that do not fit into the more strict Gendernomics definition. Where Gendernomics is often largely descriptive, in that it describes and explains various sexual market mechanics, red pill logic occasionally moves towards the prescriptive route of offering concrete advice on how to approach a given problem. One of the more common questions I see from newly red pilled men is where to begin. There is a mountain of theory out there that could bury a man for months if not years in reading, listening to podcasts and watching youtube, when in reality the key is to gain a balance of experience and theoretical knowledge.

One of the most challenging factors that I run into in my day to day life is the split between people who are brilliant when it comes to theory, but have virtually no experience, and people who are highly experienced but have no knowledge of theory. The latter are often the most challenging to work with, because they may have had quite a bit of success but lack the ability to explain why a given approach worked, while at the same time fearing that if they alter their approach, it will lead to lower success rate. The former can be very easy to work with provided that they are humble and realize that not all theory is applicable.

This train of though lead me to wondering about what path a newly red pilled man should take in order to maximize the efficiency of his red pill journey. When I first became familiar with game, the recommendation was to go out and do 100 cold approaches, which can be great advice as it will eliminate much approach anxiety, get you used to approaching, talking to girls and most importantly get you immediate feedback on your level of game and sexual market value. However, it can also be like having a person who has never worked out in their life do a 100 squat challenge that leaves them sore to the point where they can’t walk for a month, and determined to never again enter a gym.

On the other hand, a man who has some success already, getting fairly regular relationships and occasional one night stands, or getting regular one night stands but struggling with making them into something more, may have progressed beyond the 100 cold approaches already. For him, this becomes like taking someone who has trained with weights for a decade and putting them on a low-volume, low intensity recovery program. This means they are not progressing at the optimal rate, they may experience getting weaker and most importantly it wastes their time.

I wondered for a bit whether I should break this down by the socio-sexual hierarchy, alpha, beta, delta, omega, gamma and sigma, however Alphas and Sigmas are unlikely to be looking for basic advice on how to apply the red pill, except for in situations where a blue pill alpha recently got hit with “I’m not happy” or something similar. Breaking it down by sexual market value seemed to be a more appropriate form, as sexual market value to some extent is de-coupled from a man’s position in the dominance hierarchy. Continue reading

Red Pill Logic: Philosophies and Toolboxes

I had a different post intended for this week, however given some recent events I thought that this essay was a more salient one. The word philosophy comes from Greek and simply means “Love of Wisdom”, historically philosophy encompassed all bodies of knowledge including science, which was known as “natural philosophy”. According to Google it has two primary definitions:

  1. the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence, especially when considered as an academic discipline.
  2. a theory or attitude that acts as a guiding principle for behavior.

The red pill philosophy is primarily focused on the second definition, however in the study of gender dynamics and mating behavior it steps into the domain of the first definition. In this role the philosophy is focused on the fundamental nature of reality when it comes to gender dynamics and mating behaviors. However, it acts as a toolbox, and a framework, not as an all-encompassing philosophy of life.

To draw the distinction between these two types of philosophy according to definition number 2, one could take the example of capitalism and marxism. Capitalism is a philosophy of economic management. It has certain principles such as the rational actor, individual choice, for profit operation, wage labor and various others that deal purely with commerce. Capitalism can be applied as a system within free market capitalism, state capitalism or other systems of political and social management. While one could argue that capitalism as a system of resource management has synergy effects with certain political and social governance systems, these are not a prerequisite for it. The goal of capitalism is the most efficient management of resources. Thus, capitalism is an end in itself.

Marxism on the other hand is a philosophy of economic management, but it is also a political, social and moral philosophy that encompasses most areas of life in some way. For instance, within Marxism the means of production are jointly owned by the population, there is no wage labor and no for profit operation. Where capitalism focuses purely on the management of resources, Marxism also prescribes solutions for the social and political system. In the case of Marxism the social and political governance systems are a prerequisite for the economic system. The goal of marxism is the management of resources for the betterment of the conditions for a majority of the population. Thus, Marxism is a means to an end. Continue reading