Red Pill Apocalypse

[daddymonsterpoodle]

That's a whole bunch of ten dollar words to say no one is purely red pill or blue pill and both those terms don't matter to someone who is confident in themselves and making their own choices.

 

[MrAddiction]

That's a whole bunch of ten dollar words to say no one is purely red pill or blue pill and both those terms don't matter to someone who is confident in themselves and making their own choices.

I can not read that out of the original post. All I read i is another critical Speeches against The Red Pill based on ten Dollar words taken from some philosophers that by far do not represent all philosophers. It is just some quotes taken to fit in the speech. I could find other quotes of famous philosophers that state the exact oppisite.

 

[MrAddiction]

I answered in the quote

What else does the red pill represent but philosophical doubt. That is like saying: What else is the world than Imagination in your brain. Where previously this doubt was critical and directed towards so-called knowledge [not common sense belief], the doubt itself has now become elevated into a principle -- we are to subject all beliefs to a radical form of doubt, and after this purge reconstruct life along purely rational principles. This is most clearly seen in Descartes’ philosophy, where an isolated individual mind is disembodied and floats free of everything perceived to be outside itself. It is pure self-consciousness. It is also solipsism. Redpill is way more than a doubt! Saying redpill is only a doubt and now doubt elevated to a principle is like: saying Santa Clause does not exist is only a principle elevated from doubt.

The red pill enthusiast sees a gulf between himself and those in the blue pill camp. It is the individual radicalized versus the man socialized.
Where is it mentioned that Red Pill says man is not socialized. I have never seen that anywhere! Only because the redpill shows men how not to allow themselfes beeing played by women anymore is not to equate with not being socialized. Even Mgtow are not unsocialized: given they would not communicate to any woman - then they still would socialize with each other! No woman needed. But as stated before: redpill vs bluepill is not a dichotomie which can bes paralelled with Individual radicalism vs the man socialized.
The difference between Blue Pill and Red Pill men is believing in santa clause or knowing - not doubting - there is no such thing as Santa Clause, eventhough we were taught otherwise our earlier childhood years. In opposite of the nonexistence of Santa, what was told to us, we had to discover the reality of the redpill by ourselfes. Some are even doomed to never see the truth.

Previous to Descartes [before the Cartesian shift], man was understood to be a social animal. Practical philosophy [pragmatism] always trumped pure philosophy [speculation], and belief doubt. In so far as a man was critical, he sought to improve both himself and the social context he found himself situated in.
Nothing else seeks the redpill. Redpill seeks to improve the individual man and wants to improve the social context (womens hypergamy and its negative impact on our society which does not provide any borders to it anymore) men today find themselfes in.

Philosophy, in the abstract, was simply not taken so seriously [consider Sartre’s sin of seriousness]. It is interesting how much emphasis is put on confidence [con-fide… with faith] in the ‘manosphere’ today.

When a man moves in confidence his life energy flows through all abstractions – they are seen from differing perspectives, and then a unity is be found among the scattered debris of analysis. And dry dichotomies such as individual/ social, and red pill/ blue pill are seen for what they are – fictions.
The reality is man is a social animal. That maybe or maybe not. Schopenhauer would state something else. You can not state that as given and common sense.

Free your mind.
Exactly what I did with the red pill.

 

[daddymonsterpoodle]

I disagree with the belief that red pill is individual radicalised. The fact that there is even a manosphere seems like a contraindicator. We are on a forum of men (supposedly red pill swallower) to give and recieve advice from others. That seems like community not individualism. You could argue that red pill theory is a move away from individualism.
There are many on here who also think red pill/blue pill is a false dichotomy as is alpha/beta.
Red pill is simply a lens for interpreting behaviour. It is also not an absolute, like all knowledge use it as you see fit. There will be parts you agree with and parts you don't. That is ok.

There are many men who have applied red pill theory to their lives and achieved quantifiable results, myself included.

If you have a problem with redpill theory, masculinity and hypergamy feel free to give us specifics to debate.

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

Deep thoughts by Jack Handy! I enjoyed
reading your post but at the same time it gave me a head ache. I wish I enjoyed
reading philosophy but my brain can't handle it, it just feels like mental masturbation to me. I prefer to free my mind of it!

Yes, I see you point. I consider myself deeply ambivalent to philosophy. I like to think I can entertain the spirit of it, its skeptical criticism, rather than be subjected to its letter, or its rationalism.

As they say, 'a little knowledge is a dangerous thing', which would make a lot of it positively fatal!

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

I disagree with the belief that red pill is individual radicalised. The fact that there is even a manosphere seems like a contraindicator. We are on a forum of men (supposedly red pill swallower) to give and recieve advice from others. That seems like community not individualism. You could argue that red pill theory is a move away from individualism.
There are many on here who also think red pill/blue pill is a false dichotomy as is alpha/beta.
Red pill is simply a lens for interpreting behaviour. It is also not an absolute, like all knowledge use it as you see fit. There will be parts you agree with and parts you don't. That is ok.

There are many men who have applied red pill theory to their lives and achieved quantifiable results, myself included.

If you have a problem with redpill theory, masculinity and hypergamy feel free to give us specifics to debate.

Frequenting a forum of like-minded individuals is double-edged. On the one hand, we have the means of sharing and disseminating information, on the other, there is the tendency to slide into Group Think.

Given the nature of the beast, controversy [on a controversial site] should be encouraged, not slammed. I guess my problem is an over-emphasis on 'redpill theory' leads to a bent for dogmatic thinking.

I am not either 'for or against' redpill theory. What I'm saying is you just can not take it too seriously. It is a limited truth/perspective, and if once we were deluded by seeing the world through a pair of rosy colored spectacles, the solution is not to be found in a pair of bright red ones. Rather, we should look at the world as it is, and if the glare is too much for us, have a manifold of spectacles on hand.

Of course, I don't think you'd disagree with any of this... from a theoretical perspective. The problem is more a practical one; we spend many an hour here and find our minds habituated to thinking in a certain way.

..........

To be more specific; the problem of all theory is it is built on fallacies:
Many/ most x is like y, so all x are y.
Some things are clear and distinct, therefore all can be clear and distinct.

Simple fact is that not all women can be read along 'redpill' lines. Indeed, the more the 'quality' of the women is, the less 'redpill' theory helps. It could actually hinder you here. But 'redpillers' will deny qualitative differences; remember, all x are y. That is why 'redpillars' are more concerned with the mass of women, and the number of their partners. Personally, what I think is in conflict here is the pursuit of excellence [self-development] and the pursuit of power [this has always been at the center of theory].

In sum, I'd say the more selective you are towards women - the more concerned you are about those nebulous properties of quality and excellence - then the less 'redpill theory' is applicable, or even desirable.

 

[daddymonsterpoodle]

I don't like dogma or ideologies either. I get your point. I am not sure that this community is especially unified as recent bouts of electronic **** comparisons will testify. I can't help but think almost any forum you go on whether it is fly-fishing, american hot-rods or the la leche league will have a hint of dogma about it.
The predominant thing that unifies people on this board is being hurt badly because the model men had of women was fundamentally flawed and that the culturally endorsed patterns of behaviour just didn't work. "be a good provider, be sensitive, it is OK to cry, if you are honest and loyal your wife will be too, be nice, don't be macho... etc..."
Apart from that though people can't even agree what Alpha is, let alone all aspects of red pill theory.
Yeah, the crux of this forum is self-improvement is a good thing and will probably help to get you laid.
Power doesn't enter into the equation apart from personal power and the ability to make choices about what and who you do.

Even if everyone could agree on these things the fact that everyone is at a different point on the tecovery spectrum from frothing woman haters on one end to women are fantastic on the other end again would discourage too much homogeneity.

I'll ask again though, what particular aspects of red-pill theory do you struggle with?

 

[mrgoodstuff]

I don't like dogma or ideologies either. I get your point. I am not sure that this community is especially unified as recent bouts of electronic **** comparisons will testify.
The predominant thing that unifies people on this board is being hurt badly because the model men had of women was fundamentally flawed and that the culturally endorsed patterns of behaviour just didn't work. "be a good provider, be sensitive, it is OK to cry, if you are honest and loyal your wife will be too, be nice, don't be macho... etc..."
Apart from that though people can't even agree what Alpha is, let alone all aspects of red pill theory.
Yeah, the crux of this forum is self-improvement is a good thing and will probably help to get you laid.
Power doesn't enter into the equation apart from personal power and the ability to make choices about what and who you do.

Even if everyone could agree on these things the fact that everyone is at a different point on the tecovery spectrum from frothing woman haters on one end to women are fantastic on the other end again would discourage too much homogeneity.

I'll ask again though, what particular aspects of red-pill theory do you struggle with?

I agree with how you put this. The model that many of us where programmed about women, does not jive with the reality. Change and adaptation must occur.

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

I don't like dogma or ideologies either. I get your point. I am not sure that this community is especially unified as recent bouts of electronic **** comparisons will testify.
The predominant thing that unifies people on this board is being hurt badly because the model men had of women was fundamentally flawed and that the culturally endorsed patterns of behaviour just didn't work. "be a good provider, be sensitive, it is OK to cry, if you are honest and loyal your wife will be too, be nice, don't be macho... etc..."
Apart from that though people can't even agree what Alpha is, let alone all aspects of red pill theory.
Yeah, the crux of this forum is self-improvement is a good thing and will probably help to get you laid.
Power doesn't enter into the equation apart from personal power and the ability to make choices about what and who you do.

Even if everyone could agree on these things the fact that everyone is at a different point on the tecovery spectrum from frothing woman haters on one end to women are fantastic on the other end again would discourage too much homogeneity.

I'll ask again though, what particular aspects of red-pill theory do you struggle with?

Dare I say there is something unmasculine about this concern 'not to be hurt'. And in both the pre and post red-pill stages.

First, men failed to think for themselves, they failed to embark on their own heroic journey through life... for want of better words. They bought into the prevailing attitudes and false expectations of the mass of men [lacked education][.... and surprise surprise, were disappointed and hurt.

And so the reaction set in, where now a man is on the defensive. He has raised a wall between his ego and the world, and god dammit! nothing is going to hurt him again.

In both of these cases is the lack of adventure, exploring an unknown [development]. And in exploration you are going to get your nose bloodied from time to time. You will not react, but adapt, stiff upper lip and all that, and carry on with all the masculine traits.

The reaction to hurt, where you know look to defend yourself in power games, seems, if I dare say it, a feminine trait. You are looking to beat women at their own games, rather than truly leading them into something better.

 

[daddymonsterpoodle]

Respectfully, nobody bought into anything unless you call being raised in a culture and it's values and mores `buying in`.
As informed adults we can choose to reject, with difficulty, the values we were raised with but rejection just for the sake of rejecting them without a reason seems schizophrenic and irrational at worst or childish at best.

As for it being unmasculine to avoid hurt, although I acknowledge we are the disposable gender and the risk takers that does not mean we are masochists. There is a difference between being dumped and feeling sad and being so wounded by a relationship that you think the only solution is to drive your car into oncoming traffic, and which is where a lot of men have been, myself included.
You said need to adapt not react. Men are trying to do that by rejecting old models that weren't working for them and trying new theories and developing new understandings. Of course men are reacting. Unless you have been living under a rock or in a philosophy department somewhere you would know that there is a lot to react to. BTW adaption IS a reaction. There is a reason men are on the defensive.


To suggest that men should embrace this as part of their heroic adventure is either sadistic, and patronising or indicates lack of empathy or experience.
To be hurt and do exactly the same thing again expecting a different result is madness.

Yes, men were misinformed. They were given misinformation by their single mom's, and their female teachers, the media, and occasionally even by their dad's who were still living in a world that had already started to disappear so no, it wasn't just a mass of uneducated men mis-educating other men.
Where were we expected to get this information from? If we can't get the information from other men, then who could we turn to? The church seems like an unusual choice for someone who hates dogma. Our mothers? Asking women how to be happy and fulfilled men seems illogical and nonsensical to me. The government who is happily perpetuating the wife, and two kids, and white picket fence myth?

The amazing thing is that so many men are brave enough to risk being hurt again, otherwise they wouldn't be here at all, trying to find out how to adapt to the new world and not just become MGTOW or give up trying to make their lives better.

As for this mythical lack of adventure you are talking about, and most men were probably too busy paying bills, and finding someone to love, and trying to get employment, that sort of stuff, but have you thought of the results of every man going off to live this heroic life. Are there women involved in this heroic life?

I have mentioned this before but people on here are only interested in the power to control their own lives. Feel free to read about FRAME. Any woman also has a choice about whether they want to be a part of this, but so really it is all about men having power over their own lives. Power is a word used more often by feminists and liberal arts students.

Tlr?
You say men should not be afraid of getting hurt, but tell men to adapt. Why should they adapt if it isn't to avoid being hurt again.

You state that men bought in to prevailing attitudes but don't indicate where men could get alternative viewpoints then say that men coming to sites like these for information should instead be off living the heroic life.

You have also never mentioned the role of women in society and how their actions might have an impact on men and society. You state clearly that men's unhappiness is their own fault. I acknowledge that ultimately we are all responsible for our own happiness but living with someone who is bi—polar or abusive is going to make a difference to our overall mental state.

If women are not contributors to men's mental states then that implies women are passive and are only acted upon. . That seems a little sextet and demeaning. If women are contributors to men's mental state then it seems unfair to castigate men for trying to find a better way of dealing with women.

If you disagree with red pill theory, and I respect your right to do so, then maybe you should apply that critical lens to your own thinking and acknowledge the possibility that it might be you that is miseducated and enculturalised into the dominant societal model and look at which of your values is being challenged.

IMVHO

 

[Augustus_McCrae]

Jimjam,

I understand exactly what you're saying. You are seeing just how pervasive the feminine Imperative is and how it has totally hijacked our society. If you haven't read Therationalmale.com, check it out. Rollo's insight into women and our society is enlightening.

It's like you want to go up to guys, shake them and say: "Don't you realize what the Fvck is going on"? But in 99% of the cases they'll just think you're strange or bitter.

But if you're fortunate, you'll make a couple of good friends who get it. And their friendship will be invaluable to you.

Then after a while, you won't think about it as much. And you'll go about your own business, keeping your thoughts to yourself (except for with your close friends), and you'll enjoy your life.

-Augustus-

 

[Vantagepoint34]

WTF you created the zombies Nature Force!! I'm in the Destroyer

taiyuu_otoko

象外Haha. Search is your friend

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

Respectfully, nobody bought into anything unless you call being raised in a culture and it's values and mores `buying in`.
As informed adults we can choose to reject, with difficulty, the values we were raised with but rejection just for the sake of rejecting them without a reason seems schizophrenic and irrational at worst or childish at best.

As for it being unmasculine to avoid hurt, although I acknowledge we are the disposable gender and the risk takers that does not mean we are masochists. There is a difference between being dumped and feeling sad and being so wounded by a relationship that you think the only solution is to drive your car into oncoming traffic, and which is where a lot of men have been, myself included.
You said need to adapt not react. Men are trying to do that by rejecting old models that weren't working for them and trying new theories and developing new understandings. Of course men are reacting. Unless you have been living under a rock or in a philosophy department somewhere you would know that there is a lot to react to. BTW adaption IS a reaction. There is a reason men are on the defensive.


To suggest that men should embrace this as part of their heroic adventure is either sadistic, and patronising or indicates lack of empathy or experience.
To be hurt and do exactly the same thing again expecting a different result is madness.

Yes, men were misinformed. They were given misinformation by their single mom's, and their female teachers, the media, and occasionally even by their dad's who were still living in a world that had already started to disappear so no, it wasn't just a mass of uneducated men mis-educating other men.
Where were we expected to get this information from? If we can't get the information from other men, then who could we turn to? The church seems like an unusual choice for someone who hates dogma. Our mothers? Asking women how to be happy and fulfilled men seems illogical and nonsensical to me. The government who is happily perpetuating the wife, and two kids, and white picket fence myth?

The amazing thing is that so many men are brave enough to risk being hurt again, otherwise they wouldn't be here at all, trying to find out how to adapt to the new world and not just become MGTOW or give up trying to make their lives better.

As for this mythical lack of adventure you are talking about, and most men were probably too busy paying bills, and finding someone to love, and trying to get employment, that sort of stuff, but have you thought of the results of every man going off to live this heroic life. Are there women involved in this heroic life?

I have mentioned this before but people on here are only interested in the power to control their own lives. Feel free to read about FRAME. Any woman also has a choice about whether they want to be a part of this, but so really it is all about men having power over their own lives. Power is a word used more often by feminists and liberal arts students.

Tlr?
You say men should not be afraid of getting hurt, but tell men to adapt. Why should they adapt if it isn't to avoid being hurt again.

You state that men bought in to prevailing attitudes but don't indicate where men could get alternative viewpoints then say that men coming to sites like these for information should instead be off living the heroic life.

You have also never mentioned the role of women in society and how their actions might have an impact on men and society. You state clearly that men's unhappiness is their own fault. I acknowledge that ultimately we are all responsible for our own happiness but living with someone who is bi—polar or abusive is going to make a difference to our overall mental state.

If women are not contributors to men's mental states then that implies women are passive and are only acted upon. . That seems a little sextet and demeaning. If women are contributors to men's mental state then it seems unfair to castigate men for trying to find a better way of dealing with women.

If you disagree with red pill theory, and I respect your right to do so, then maybe you should apply that critical lens to your own thinking and acknowledge the possibility that it might be you that is miseducated and enculturalised into the dominant societal model and look at which of your values is being challenged.

IMVHO

Yes, that is the 'default option'.... the mass of men always 'buy into' the mass culture from the lack of learning to think for themselves. That's simply the sad truth... education, in the authentic meaning of the word, only belongs to an elite [the self-educated are a natural elite].

But then, if not due to natural curiosity but some existential crisis, we wake up from our 'default option' slumber, and look about to latch onto the first thing that makes sense out of our incoherence. We become infatuated, or infactuated, with some idea, or set of ideas, which presents itself as the solution to our problem. The world has been problematized. And undergirding the perception of the world as a problem, is always some negative emotion such as anger, hurt, resentment etc, which is common to all ideologies. This is the stage of 'enthusiasm', we think we have the answer because we have gained power over ourselves or the world.

But progress is a process, and then we start wondering if perhaps reality is more complex, and we go from infatuation with a specific form of knowledge [knowledge as power, which is always limited] to a more mature desire for, and appreciation of, all forms of knowledge. If theoretical knowledge is like adolescent infatuation, then the practical knowledge of experience, in all its multiple forms, which requires the most open of minds, is like true love. Yet, people will ask what love is... sigh.

Again, this is not a case of either 'agreeing or disagreeing with redpill'. I have antipathy to this anti-thetical way of thinking [but at least it is thinking, and certain progress from the unthinking state of the over-washed masses]. What I'm saying is that 'red-pill' is a significant stage in a larger organic process, where the mind truly frees itself.

 

[ChristopherColumbus]

I have mentioned this before but people on here are only interested in the power to control their own lives. Feel free to read about FRAME. Any woman also has a choice about whether they want to be a part of this, but so really it is all about men having power over their own lives. Power is a word used more often by feminists and liberal arts students.

Yes, we all want a sense of control in our lives. We don't want to be subjected to random forces like a piece of driftwood on the sea.

But power is qualified; we have no absolute power. Some things we have power over, some things we don't; some we should, some we shouldn't.

An obsession with power has been a constant theme running the length of Western thought. Consider the Faustian Pact. Unbridled power has as much potential to impoverish our life as enrich it.

So the question is where do you draw the line with power, and where do other ideals come into the equation to counter-balance it.

 

[daddymonsterpoodle]

What you are doing despite your claims is the exact opposite of enlightenment, or understanding.
The truly free or enlightened person just lives in a way that is concordant with their nature. They are not learning any theories, they are not analysing Western thought, and platonic principles, and or societal modalities.

They are content with their life.

At the heart of Redhill theory is inner game. Everything else is a paint-by-numbers guide to get there.

When you are truly happy and confident in your self, and when you have become self-realised all the PUA stuff becomes irrelevant.

I think the same is true for your many theories and questions. While you are looking for understanding (to be applauded) the simple truths are just passing you by.

 

[btownbuck2012]

The silver lining for me is knowing the truth about it all. It's not an easy pill to swallow I completely agree with you 100%. The lies you mention above just make me chuckle now, I think back to all the broads I've dated & how many lies I heard. It ALL makes sense to me now.

Definitely agree with this. That's how I cope, too. As painful as it has been to swallow the red pill and accept women and people in general for what they really are, I would never want to go back to how I was before. I can't even imagine.

The way I look at it is I'm taking the pain now (in my 20s) so that I can enjoy life more thoroughly in my 30s,40s,50s,etc. I can almost guarantee that If I hadn't discovered sosuave.com and rollo's blog, I would have ended up being one of these guys you hear about who marries a woman who doesn't really love him and gets cheated on.

Same thing with my career, I know how important it is now to follow your own heart and ambition in life because following the well worn road doesn't necessarily lead to a blue pill fantasy life where you have a great wife who loves you unconditionally and a couple of kids and a great job that'll enable you to retire comfortably someday. I know now that life just doesn't work like that for a-lot of people.

So again, it's hard, but knowing the truth is so much more important than embracing and clinging to a false reality.