/lit/ - Literature

No, I agree. You go a little overboard with the negative attribution and armchair psychoanalysis though.

Dude, you're talking about people who literally use interactive childrens toys terminology. Stop wasting your time writing posts too long for them to read and just call them incels like everyone else does.

>>11762850
No no, that's all the OTHER guys, I'm doing way better and have real friends and a purpose.

S-shut up NPC.

>>11762850
post this on r9k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk3xzmTI-WM
I didn't read your post but what pissed me off about this """meme""" is that its old as shit and people try to pass it off as the new 'it'

lit is not pol take your shit back

>>11762850
Sudden switch to subvocalising at the end made me chuckle.

But it's 'p-zombie', not 'NPC'.

>>11762850
thats unironically what a butthurt NPC would say

>>11762850
Projecting : The post.

>npcs hates being called npcs

>>11762872
t. someone who thinks that trump is hitler

Just shut up.

https://xkcd.com/610/

>>11762904
read the article. PCs project this onto NPCs

This NPC thing is just a form of group solipsism.

Well yes, it's pretty self-evident. Don't know why you went through the effort of typing it out like some big revelation, right here in front of the meme's target audience.

You should know that it’s poor form to inb4 as op.

>>11762850
OP is a player character.

>>11762850
you're clearly malfunctioning if you "thought" this was a good post

Why the fuck is this having a resurgence, anyway?
I saw it a few a few days ago, but now the catalog is full of that insufferable caret-nosed wojak. Did /x/ decide to spread "the good word"?
There's little substance to this meme other than feeling smug so I can only hope they get tired of it soon.

>>11762919
But that's based and redpilled, anon


Also, do we know how many black people and women are NPCs?

>>11762923
its because the OP is wrong, it actually is a genuinely valuable factor in the overman

>>11762941
I'm an ovenman, ama

its just a lack of empathy, a lack of willingness to understand that other people are different and have other priorities to you. sad really

>>11762939
It’s even dumber than real solipsism because the concept that everybody except the subjective observer is a p-zombie is self-coherent.

The NPC thing speculates that some people are p-zombies, while others aren’t, despite providing no legitimate methodology for discerning between the two groups.

Imagine having so much resentiment that you believe the people you resent are p-zombies.

>>11762850
>>11762907

>>11762948

>>11762948
This desu, there is more to a person than what you see at the surface, OP's pic is probably a magaped redditor from the 2016 elections but the same could be said of him, yet I'm sure regardless of normalfaggotry or politics, people are radically different than what they appear once you get to know them

>>11762956
well its not everyone else just 80% of people. but yeah ressentiment for normies has been half of its relevance for a long time

>>11762965
how often do you "get to know" people?

>>11762975
When you make an effort to interact with them, obviously it takes multiple times for someone to open up beyond whatever surface discussion they have about movies and politics.
My point is OP isn't trying to make an effort to reach others, so obviously they seem alien to him except for the few people who tried reaching out for him.

>>11762975
actually "getting to know" people isn't really the point, the point is understanding that everyone is far more complicated than what seems on the surface

>>11762975
Not the same guy as >>11762965, but during my mandatory military service I met and was forced to live with lots of different kinds of people from all conceivable backgrounds.
During guard duty in particular, when it's just you and one other guy in a tiny room for four hours, you talk about stuff you would never usually talk about with people you would never usually meet. It was a very eye-opening experience, and what snapped me out of my own "everyone but me are dumb" phase in highschool.

>>11762850
The self indulgent over-conscious autistic pseudo-apollonian virginal underman is in a certain sense superior.

>>11762996
but how would you know that if you didnt "get to know" them

>>11763000
becuase that's the most logical thing to assume. what's more likely: somehow you are the only person who is conscious or whatever or you are just one out of billions of people that are all as complicated as you?

>>11762856
>armchair psychoanalysis
Is there any other kind of psychoanalysis I am not aware of?

>>11763006
It's also instrumental in living well/happily to assume that others are experiencing beings. Although it is not absolutely known, all available information appears to imply it, and it is far easier to get around and live life and make meaningful relationships if you don't assume that other persons are literal zombies. Having at least some level of human interaction and intimacy is more or less a human need; declining it on the grounds of uncertainty is like declining to eat because you don't know for sure if eating is a human need.

>>11763006
firstly >>11762969
secondly its far likelier to be that person who would develop that kind of theory. an NPC would never create an awareness of the NPC - PC dichotomy. to say that its unlikely is like saying that we can assume that earth doesnt have intelligent life on it since the chances are so astronomically low, but we only know of it and can think of it because we are that unlikely thing.

>>11763028
it really helps to enrich our lives as well because literally anyone can give you insight and knowledge onto things you didn't know about, because everyone's experiences are so different
>>11763029
what are you even trying to say?

>>11762850
I was going to basically agree with you right until the part where you regurgitated that sub-vocalizing bullshit, which convinced me that your are just as dumb and in need of creating an "outside-group" as everyone else (or, of course, are baiting).
Memes are in fact not to be taken too seriously.

>>11763006
I'd say there are tons of people who are way more interesting than me, but also plenty who aren't (and Lord knows I don't set a high bar).

NEVER SHOULD'VE COME HERE

>objectively inferior to those who have the innate ability to take a more efficient and optimal route to learning
Holy shit, he buys into the efficiency meme so hard he thinks it applies to poems and story books

>>11763071
prove him wrong ;)

yet another fake meme promoted on a massive level by a clique of teenage youtubers in order to later collect thousands of views from preteen memers

>god I hate how this group of people are desperately trying to make themselves seem superior to everyone else by mocking them and their thought-processes
>yes, that stupid group of autistic, repulsive, impotent, self indulgent, over-conscious, pseudo-apollonian, virginal, schizophrenic, delusional, pretentious, understimulated, inferior sub-vocalizing, underman-incels
Honestly the fact that some of you didn't realize that this was a troll post until the last sentence is the most worrying thing about this entire thread.

>>11763089
okay

>>11762850
everyone has inner speech. It doesn’t happen 100% in your waking life and that’s where variance lies. That misquoted study is garbage and inconclusive. Believing a one-off pop-psych study like that (sample size 30, self report measures, hasn’t been reproduced, no other experimentally distinct studies corroborate it, etc) is intellectually negligent. Not to mention there are at least 4 other modes of thinking that complement inner dialogue modality.

I think (hope) most people on /lit/ are just memeing, mocking /pol/ idiots that twisted this old study to fit their worldview and unironically think white people are the only ones with inner speech.

If people on /lit/ aren’t being ironic then I’d say I’d have to agree with you OP

>>11763100
If there is variety and the NPC:ness of people is more of a "slide" you would hardly have disproved the NPC meme (and I agree with you btw, I think it has to do with many factors). Intelligence and solitude being the biggest ones

>people who feel inferior employ coping mechanisms to not feel inferior
Huh wow, never heard that one before. You should publish it anon.

Are we all just collectively falling for forced memes or is it part of the meme nowadays to pretend you fall for forced memes?

>>11763089
it isn't a troll post, he just isn't self-aware (a typical p-zombie quality)

>>11763100
If you actually ask around you will find people that simply don't have it. Ask them to close their eyes and 'say' a phrase in their heads, and they cannot do it.

I don't think this makes them 'npc', I mean I think that way quite often instead of verbally, but it is a real thing.

>>11762850
>those who need to sub-vocalise in order to understand books are objectively inferior to those who have the innate ability to take a more efficient and optimal route to learning.
I thought in all studies, sub vocalization is by far the most efficient method of reading comprehension

>>11762850
you don't seem to understand what inner speech is. It Is something you can turn on or off, at least for me. It occurs naturally when I am having moments of clarity or understanding, and in moments of confusion I can turn it on to reason about things, instead of allowing the free flowing associative mode of thinking just wander about. Both modes have a logic, but they are different kinds of thought.

Do NPSs sing in the shower?

>>11763089
Some people are just really stupid

>>11763178
Yes, but only Singing in the Rain

>>11763159
I don't believe you. Haven't you seen all those posts about reading things in a different voice
>like this

>>11763200
Dude just ask some people, you dont have to believe me lol

>>11763066
I YIELD! I YIELD!

>>11762850
Can you give me a quest?

>>11763233
go have anal sex with 10 african men
the reward is 15 exp points

>>11763240
I should have expected this from the "OP is a faggot" questline. Sorry, but I decline.

>>11762850
its okay Mr. NPC, you tried your best. dont worry about it, lets take some soma together. all the cool guys are doing it too

>>11763246
>declining quests
what are you, gay?

>>11763250
actually no

>>11763279
so qo out there and get your asshole ripped/ rip some assholes!

reset all inessential NPCs

>>11763250
>>11763286
I want to have a word with the demiurge employee responsible for this bot's terrible dialogue. Writing standards have really been too lax as of late.

>>11762850
so true

>>11762975
There's very few people you a really get to know in your life. Your closest friends, your family and significant others.

>>11762850
>taking the NPC meme seriously

>>11763562
i feel like i can immediately tell how people are. Whenever i meet someone i instinctively kind of see their 'thing' and the more time I spend with them the more it is confirmed. People never surprise me for one thing, their actions always make sense to me according to their 'thing'.

This could be delusion however.

>>11763616
It is delusion, we all make assumptions about people without knowing how things really are

>>11762865

Top NPC response.

>>11762948
>he reads NPC bios
Just skip that an play the story.

>>11763616
maybe you were only looking for things that validate your first thought about them and ignoring everything else

>>11763151
t.npc

But what else is to be done with us anon? Those of us who tried and tried and tried and still failed to find a place in "normal" society? The "pseudo schizophrenic delusion" as you so aptly put it is all we have.

>>11764119
well in my case i find social relationships that arent reliant on factors outside of my control. the camaraderie of athletic training among motivated and inspired friends is largely a product of your own willpower (assuming you can find others like you) and something that is very fulfilling and offers a large chance for connection with others. as another anon mentioned above the tendency for internal monologue is largely a product of solitude among other things so finding something useful like this might help to gain what is necessary. doesnt have to be athleticism, any noble pursuit would probably do.

>>11764178
I agree anon, and I already do exactly that. But I'm still an outsider, I don't have anyone who truly understands me as a whole person, outside maybe a few anons. Without those deeper connections I feel forced to retreat into myself lest I kill myself out of loneliness.

>>11763013
paid armchair psychoanalysis

>>11762948
its called autism. Actual autism, not the meme autism.

>>11764119
you could try going outside for once

>>11764291
I got outside every day anon. Please don't assume everyone who's failed is a basement dwelling neet, I've done decently well for myself and have tried time and time again to integrate into "real" society. Never worked.

OP picrel

>>11762929
This ain't 2008. The old gods are dead, and they took their laws with them

>>11762944
What's your favorite thing to bake?

>>11763161
It is

>>11764317
So what do you mean by "real" society? If you've done well for yourself, you're a participant in it to some degree

Where were you when you realized that Buddhism is weaponized nihilism designed to make mindless, passive NPC's?

>Can't stuffer if you give yourself a psychological lobotomy.

>>11764443
>So what do you mean by "real" society?
I mean that while I may have a respectable job and demeanor at the end of the day I'm still a loser who goes home and posts on 4chan about how lonely and sad he is

>>11764492
Buddhism and Hinduism. Meanwhile Abrahamism is a different kind of weaponized nihilism.

>>11764492
Literally any Buddhist teacher worth their salt would tell you that what you've got a wildly inaccurate conception of Buddhism.

>>11764492
Stuffer? I barely know 'er!

>>11764495
Honestly, it seems like your problem is mostly in your head

>>11764492
>Buddhism is weaponized nihilism
the only excuse for this view is if you are from some sheltered baptist flyover and just got internet today

>>11764533
Yeah my lack of friendships and meaningful social interaction is all in my head, thanks anon.

>the tendency to talk to yourself and generate simulations of other personalities in your mind is not a remarkable ability to be proud of
>those who need to sub-vocalise in order to understand books are objectively inferior to those who have the innate ability to take a more efficient and optimal route to learning
Empirically false.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17470218.2011.647039
https://students.education.unimelb.edu.au/LiteracyResearch/pub/Projects/OL/1SelfTalk_RBaker.pdf

>>11763616
You're right to an extant. More often than not, people- without realizing it- fall into certain categories of person that you can only recognize with having seen multiple people who fall into that category. Of course, when you're first meeting anyone you must always give them the benefit of the doubt that they are a unique individual worth talking to, but after a while they might say something about themselves in a way, or express interest in something in a way, where something snaps and you realize that this person is just another example of a common societal archetype. Most of the time, however, the type of stereotype they fall into isn't enough to dehumanize them in my eyes, but rather a peculiarity that I appreciate.

But there are instances, especially with sociopathic types, where the instant I realize the type of person they are, I want to gtfo immediately

>>11762872
fuck off narwhal faggot

>>11764615
Go back to /v/

>>11764492

He looks like a creature from The Brood and sounds like one too.

>>11762850
>those who need to sub-vocalise in order to understand books are objectively inferior to those who have the innate ability to take a more efficient and optimal route to learning.

Do you seriously read literature and poetry by just scanning the words with your eyes? You are missing a lot of what makes it beautiful if so.

>>11764642
sub-vocalizing is reading the words "aloud" in your head; actually imagining the sounds of the words.
I can appreciate how whatever I am reading sounds, but what is beautiful is actually seeing the images and scenes the book is describing. That's not sub-vocalization.

You are enjoying literature wrong. It's the rhythmic sound of each sentence that matters most.

>>11764664
>but what is beautiful is actually seeing the images and scenes the book is describing.
what a pleb, please learn to enjoy the complexity of language and oral tradition

>>11764691
like, I agree, but nothing is "the most". the stuff you don't like isn't fluff.

>>11764714
if books were about appreciating oral tradition they wouldn't be written down, dumb ass

>>11762941
That not conforming to this society is an obvious characteristic of the evolution of man does not mean that chantards who are all but exiled from it are this evolution of man.

>>11764596
actually really interesting thanks
does that mean having obsessive imaginary conversations with my waifu makes me an overman?

>>11762850
>Plato just resented power
>I guess I'll resent fellow slaves instead
NEETchuh was the final boss NPC.

From a /v/ post:

All you people raising points like "this is just the newest 'i'm special' excuse" are coming from a good place but you have to realize that we actually are in a unique position here. Nearly everyone in this thread most likely has an IQ above 100, and that's an assumption I can make just on you being here. We are in a bubble of people who enjoy writing and reading posts on internet forums, and most of us do it proficiently. It's easy to let yourself readjust your idea of "average" in an environment like this to adapt, but keep in mind that fucking HALF the population has a sub-100 IQ. Simply being on the internet (beyond the most popular sites like twitter and instagram) puts you in an environment of people with above-average intelligence. There are millions and millions of people on this Earth who are straight up fucking dumb, and they're dumb in a way that would feel completely alien to most of you.

Look at this page, it's a breakdown of general ability by IQ bracket
https://paulcooijmans.com/intelligence/iq_ranges.html

Notice that "able to learn from written materials," which most of you clearly do (even if to a stupid extent) is placed in the 100-109 bracket. Imagine not being able to learn from the things you read. That is half the American population.

>>11764730
Then how would the information be stored?

>>11764798
>From a /v/ post:
>Nearly everyone in this thread most likely has an IQ above 100,

>>11764798
>Nearly everyone in this thread most likely has an IQ above 100, and that's an assumption I can make just on you being here.
Even the polfags?

>>11764808
through a fucking oral tradition like how information was preserved prior to writing, and how it still is stored in what few completely illiterate societies still exist.

>>11764812
>>11764819
whaddya know, he wrote a response to a similar reply:

I stand behind this claim. This is tricky to talk about here, given our culture of elitism and self-hatred, but you should recognize that even the most irritating posters you see on here generally possess a decent amount of intelligence. That doesn't make them smart compared to the rest of 4chan or yourself, and that doesn't make them redeemable or worth your attention, but it's easy to tell that they do have some cognitive ability. When you see a low-IQ poster, you KNOW. They have a very hard time keeping up with the humor of our boards and sticking to the standard formats of our posts

>>11764851
>When you see a low-IQ poster, you KNOW. They have a very hard time not calling people niggers.

>>11764784
Of course anon

>>11764798
Isn't >100 iq just being able to read fluently in your mother language and being able to do basic high school math ? is a pretty shit measurement.

>>11764881
please dont use that word on this website

>>11764915
ironically, this is a very 100-105 IQ post

>>11764927
How to improve then.

>>11764924
It's not that I want to censor you, dude. Calling people niggers is all fun and games until the actual white supremacists show up. Now they're here and I'd rather lose a word than keep them.

I can't decide if >20 year old boomer or IQ-posting is my favorite /lit/ meme of 2018

>>11764915
no, it means that under a certain time limit you identify patterns as fast as most people
It doesn't mean you'll discover cold fusion or cure cancer, just identify patterns quick.

>>11764851
I don't very much care for iq, and while I don't subscribe to the idea that everyone has the same capacity (ex. mentally disabled people) I would stress that the psychodynamics of a person, how they orient and categorize their experience, may be due to the amount of exposure they have to written language over spoken language during their developmental period.
A poor guy in some ghetto somewhere isn't going to score well compared to a college student, but that college student wouldn't have the same cognitive mapping to tell a captivating story, for instance, or identify and acquire resources in a crowed urban environment.
IQ is of course biased to abstract concepts and the written word.

Could you incels at least use p-zombie instead of this cringy vidya terminology?

>>11764948
>I don't very much care for iq
Low IQ post discarded.

>>11764948
>A poor guy in some ghetto somewhere isn't going to score well compared to a college student
This isn't true at all. Modern IQ tests are designed to be completely neutral to culture and educational background. The questions are abstract

>>11764945
You are dense, you simulacra.

>>11764969
do they reveal how likely they are to improve on scientific discoveries, create impressive works of fiction, or art of any kind that isn't related to this board?
Do they meassure any practical thing where intelligence would matter? Or is it just masturbation material?

>>11764945
Look up "g-factor" and actually educate yourself before saying something embarrassing like this again

>>11764977
do you have an argument somewhere there or are you just puking random words to bump the thread?

>>11764985
>do they reveal how likely they are to improve on scientific discoveries, create impressive works of fiction, or art of any kind that isn't related to this board? Do they meassure any practical thing where intelligence would matter?
No. They just measure your intelligence.
>Or is it just masturbation material?
Not for you,

>>11764985
they correlate quite well with outcomes. Like successful lawyers all have high verbal iq, successful physiscits have high iq, etc

and they predict. if you take a group's average iq at age like 15, you can make fairly accurate predictions about them

i dont think IQ is that related to creativity thuogh, im not sure about that. That seems to be a more murky concept, whereas the pattern recognition that IQ measures is a lot more clear, with a century of work done refining it into the g concept.

>>11764985
>do they reveal how likely they are to improve on scientific discoveries, create impressive works of fiction, or art of any kind that isn't related to this board?
Literally yes. G positively correlates with proficiency in creative work, abstract reasoning, spatial reasoning, problem solving skills, reading comprehension, language proficiency, "social intelligence," strategic endeavors, you name it. Having a high g factor doesn't necessarily you'll be great or even good at all those things, but g factor is a statistical construct designed to positively correlate with them all.

>>11764962
NPC post discarded
>>11764969
you literally didnt understand his post, he said that the bias is to the abstract. unironically low IQ post discarded

>>11764955
>"pee zombie" isn't cringy

>>11764987
Thanks for proving my point you literal delusion of mine.

>>11764969
peoples experiences expose them to different sorts of abstractions. for example there are people in fairly mundane, low skilled jobs (bank tellers, bookkeepers etc) who tend to score highly on iq tests because through their work they receive frequent exposure to the sorts of thinking that constitutes a significant chunk of the iq test. this doesnt mean the tests are useless - theyre just not useful in the way you might think they are. Theyre certainly good for what the military originally used them for, ie a person current ability to perform certain sorts of cognitive tasks, but they are not useful in the way Murray et al want them to be

>>11764996
He's talking about aspects of individual expression that are completely auxillary to g. The existence of outliers (high IQ, poor ability to express thoughts, for example) doesn't nullify the statistical model. Of course he's right that there's more to know about a person than their IQ. That doesn't mean IQ shouldn't be "cared for"

>>11762935
There was article about study, which claimed that only 25% of people vocalize or see images in their head. It was posted to /pol/ and now everyone thinks that they are only non NPC.

>>11765022
>which claimed that only 25% of people vocalize or see images in their head
That's what /pol/ and various popsci outlets told you it claimed, but that's not actually even remotely close to the study's results

>>11764996
>accuses someone of misunderstanding something while misunderstanding it
Low IQ people are hilarious.

general protip: if you can't explain why they misunderstood a point you're not smarter than them

>>11765005
>for example there are people in fairly mundane, low skilled jobs (bank tellers, bookkeepers etc) who tend to score highly on iq tests because through their work they receive frequent exposure to the sorts of thinking that constitutes a significant chunk of the iq test
What the fuck do you even mean? "There are people" with high IQ in low-skill jobs? Fucking duh, that's how statistical distribution works. There are stupid people in high power and smart people serving lattes. The important part is what percentage of people in low-skilled jobs have a high IQ versus high-skill jobs, and the trend blatantly shows a correlation between IQ and success. Again, that is not to say that all high IQ individuals are successful, and all low IQ individuals aren't. We're talking about statistics here.

>>11765039
Same as if you can't argue from your opponent's point of view in a way they'd agree with

>>11765039
Nice normie-ism. In actuality you can't explain certain things to people who you're significantly smarter than because your brains operate differently.

>>11765047
that's a solid excercise but can be a ton of work

>>11765051
you learn astrophisics, it wasn't your brain that invented them on the spot.
you were taught, and if you can't do the same you just need to understand it better.

https://vocaroo.com/i/s0J91NulwVip

>>11765059
You think every human alive is capable of understanding astrophysics given enough time and education?

There is an undercurrent of crossboarding morons that lurk on /lit/ because it is "the smart board." This is due to the vicarious gratification (I think this is what Adam Smith mean't by "sympathy") that they get by thinking themselves sophisticated for, I suppose, "being around people who discuss literature." Now, of course, the only people who would think /lit/ is sophisticated are people who send the majority of their time in the dregs of this site--/r9k/ and /pol/. The problem arises for them that they cannot participate in threads here because they haven't read a book in their life, so they will usually swarm the general "philosophy" threads or post social media bait threads so they can bitch about women and "the decline of the west"(not the book because they haven't read it). When they don't have these two outlets for "participation" they will post the other, general purpose automated scripts which have cannibalized any higher functioning: "based and redpilled" and it's variants, "cringe", "snap"(you'll notice there is one /pol/tard who uses an image named "bjorksnap' ad nauseum), and all the other stupid meme responses which they have contracted from their prospective homeboards. So whenever you see something stupid like this pop up, you can be sure that it either comes from /r9k/, /pol/, or /tv/ on the back of the carrion mentioned above. Considering it's infantile terminology and implications on a societal perspective, I would guess that patient zero is /r9k/. The funny part about it is that by spewing these stupid memes and preset responses, they themselves are acting like NPC's. Also, due to the practically non-existent moderation, it only takes a few people to shit up the entire board.

>>11765062
obviously.
if it just understanding yes.
improving on the theory is a different thing, and the result of communal work by thousands of people who were taught something they didn't know before.

>>11764602
Give me a list of all the archetypes you see. Is it similar to MBTI?

>>11765065
its all steeped in so many layers of irony that its impossible to say whether thats really true

>>11765071
I admire your idealism but you're simply wrong. It's a sad fact, but some people would not be able to do anything close to understanding a complex field. Here's a generalized table of capabilities broken down by IQ:

BELOW AVERAGE
60’s are mildly retarded. May still function with supervision. usually socially inept
70’s are borderline retarded. They have problems with basic literacy and instructions, and require supervision.
80’s are problematic. Because the ‘evil 80s’ are where most violence comes from, and the average intelligence of most backward communities is in the 80’s. This is because people in this range are unable to compete but still able to plot and execute simple crimes.

AVERAGE
90 is the minimum for following written instructions, and operating machines. This is the minimum employability for routine work.
100 to learn from written materials and 105 capable of repairing machines. (Arguably 106 to articulate your own ideas). 106 appears to be the minimum median IQ for the formation of a high trust polity.

ABOVE AVERAGE
110 to manage one’s learning from instructors (college format). The closer we get in median IQ to 110 the more likely we are to have a golden age.
120 to investigate and learn on one’s own (graduate format) and 125 capable of designing machines. It is probably impossible to achieve a median IQ in this range.
130 capable of synthesizing ideas and communicating them (low level phd in soft subjects). The good to great authors are in this range.

INTELLIGENT
140+ capable of discovering and inventing new ideas using highly structured reasoning. (PhD in hard subjects)

>>11765059
>you learn astrophisics, it wasn't your brain that invented them on the spot.
>you were taught, and if you can't do the same you just need to understand it better.
I don't disagree, but what are you getting at?
>>11765062
Is it 'that' complicated? I'd think, not everyone, but everyone who's capable of learning could learn it, but I'm not familiar with it.

>>11765079
>100 to learn from written materials
thats nonsense to say that 50% of people cant do this

>>11765079
And they do IQ tests in the US to assign this stuff or you're correlating the score with what it should mean?
Because, for example, you said taking the median to 110 when 100 is defined as the top of the bell curve, 100 will always be the general score because that's what it means. If you don't understand this why would you understand what specific scores mean?

>>11765101
that being functionally smart is just a result of being taught, so being unable to explain a topic means that you don't understand it well enough.

>>11765102
why 50%
100 just means what most people got. 100 is always the clear majority.

>>11764602
Based

>>11765102
Have you met people? Most of them hold contradicting ideas and shut down their brains when the contradiction is pointed out. It's really not a stretch to say that they can't learn without supervised and guided experience.

>>11765102
That's a generalization of course, but on the whole it is true. Ask yourself, what exactly is making that so hard to believe? We live in bubbles of people with intelligence similar to ours, particularly on the internet. Your sample size of the population is a skewed one
>>11765104
This isn't my list, but the original author was talking about variance in median IQ between hypothetical groups, while still balancing the numbers around our actual current median score. Obviously any given group will still consider 100 average, even if different 100s mean actually mean different scores
>>11765120
Uhhh
Do you know what a bell curve looks like?

>>11765073
not him but the poster he was replying to and it isnt a clear set of conceptions, it is intuitive, its like ,ok you are this type but you have these mediating factors, i get you, i see your thing'

new facts revealed about the person deepen and sophisticate the understanding, but the ,thing, remains the same. if that makes sense

Here's a better IQ/ability table:
https://paulcooijmans.com/intelligence/iq_ranges.html

>>11764664
Actually the beauty of a book comes from the language itself, you pleb

>>11764798
What's a good online IQ test?

>>11765136
>Have you met people?
i live in solitude so not often. surely even menial labour jobs require this ability?

>>11764962
Not caring about IQ is actually a very high IQ opinion

>>11765147
What are you if nobody gets you and you're often told as much?

>>11765162
why are translated books beautiful then? the translator is not nearly so talented at writing than the original author for the most part

>>11765194
genuinely unusual. when somebody just really throws me off I place them in the psychopath category, which has only havppened twice and was correct both times. These were both highly charismatic people, but i couldnt see their 'thing' so i was alarmed by them

not calling you a psychopath dont worry lol. you could just be enigmatic

>>11765185
This might be the best you'll find
https://www.mensaiqtest.net/
But keep in mind it still isn't a great indicator of true IQ at all. You need a clinical IQ test for real accuracy

>>11765187
some of the guys i work with cant read. Or its arduous and they misinterpret stuff.

>>11765192
Menial labor is just that, menial labor. You learn from one of the people who does exactly what you'll do, and you do it and only it for 8 hours at a time. You might read conduct rules or something, but that's memorization, not learning.
>>11765192
So says all the 100 IQ normies.

>>11765192
Yes but not in the way he was doing (questioning its scientific legitimacy)

>>11764962
IQ worship is a disgusting, reductive and short-sighing Anglo ideology, and Alfred Binet is probably spinning in his grave right now.
>t. former gifted child

>>11765255
>>t. former gifted child
>former
Gee, I wonder why you're so jaded against it

>>11765196
A translator doesn't have to be as talented as the original author because they aren't creating the language itself, but they are talented in conveying the feeling of the original in a different language. Not all translations of a book are equal because certain translators are more talented at doing this. A good translator still does need a good command of language, both the one being translated from and to, to make a book beautiful in a different language.

Is pooposter an npc?

>>11765277
poop oster is indeed an npc

>>11765255
>IQ worship
Caring about it isn't exactly the same thing as worship.
>Anglo ideology
Oh, I get it. No, I'm not a poltard lording my race's alleged brain capacity over the other races. I'm happy with my own IQ and I don't do anything disgusting as a result of this happiness.

>>11765259
they can't be a child forever, fucking pedo

>>11762850
No it's an idea to make the people we politically disagree with mad. Jesus Christ you're trying to call out people for having autism but just went into an autistic conniption fit yourself doing it.

>>11765283
is it my poo portal that's the npc or the portaller?

im gay

yag mi

>>11765259
epic, but i'm actually a depressive alcoholic codemonkey now, so I guess my mere existence prove IQ isn't the end of it all.
But my main gripe with IQ tests is that they put a quantitative evaluation to only a subset of intelligence, mostly regarding basic logic skills, and don't take into account social or art skills. Moreover I'm pretty sure you can train to become better at IQ tests while still being a stupid fuck at the end of the day, making them a pretty flawed measure of intelligence. Workshipping a number like this is bound to make you neurotic.

Dude I fucking wish I was an NPC, the fuck are yall talking bout. Like imagine being coded to literally perform the most basic biological functions I mean seriously that sounds fucking dope

>>11763013
You aren't a psychoanalyst by trade or education. That is what is meant by "armchair".

>>11762850
This is one of those cases where OP "isn't even wrong"

>>11765344
You're arguing against a strawman. No one but a retarded teenager would claim all high IQ individuals are successful and vice versa. It's all about statistical correlation
As for the rest of your post, you're wrong. G correlates with creative talents and social skills. Again, not a 1-to-1 correlation, but a correlation nonetheless. It is possible to get slightly better at IQ tests with practice but without straight-up memorizing the answers, the improvement has a limit.

>>11763028
Read up on gutter oil and albino cannibalism and then try to claim that every human on this planet has a "soul" or sentience. Most humans on this planet objectivly could barely be classified above purely instinctivly behaving lower consciounce animals. Trainable, like a good bot, but not able to experiece the wolrd beyond what has been hard written in to them in terms of reactions.

"NPC" is just a meme because there is barely any difference between a bad AI/ NPC and most of what goes through as a homo sapience sapience. Just like there is an IQ cut off for beeing able to function in terms of problem solving there obviously also needs to be a cut off for empathy ad conscience. Accepting those differences is only logical if you ever encountered a barely human potato.

>>11762850
If you were a normal, healthy, well adjusted person you wouldn't even know what this board was you dumb faggot.

>>11765005
>a significant chunk of the iq test
Wrong. IQ tests are equally build on many different subjects. For example geometry (find the not matching form), classic math, language ( find the non matching word) etc. There are even very good results to those tests to simply ask a person to draw a human. Those scorring higher in conventional IQ tests will draw "humans" with more realism and details. That's how many children get tested as a first check up. But everyone reading this will not be able to take them, as knowing >how< to do the tests makes them fuck up the score and this is how many claim to "raise" their IQ, while actually only training their brain for questions which are there to show calculating power regarding news tasks.

>>11765369
t. NPC

>>11764541
I meant more that a change in your outlook and attitude may cause you to see yourself and those around you differntly, enabling you to get friends

>>11765259
Well IQ better correlates to intelligence, it's what it is supposed to do.
But it's too often treated as the ultimate method of measuring intelligence by burgers, when someone truly intelligent would point its limits and flaws, and try to play the game of Popperian falsification.
It's just a number, and the complex and fuzzy concept of intelligence can't be summarized with one simple variable..

>>11765358
Well IQ better correlates to intelligence, it's what it is supposed to do.
But it's too often treated as the ultimate method of measuring intelligence by burgers, when someone truly intelligent would point out its limits and flaws, and try to play the game of Popperian falsification.
It's just a number, the complex and fuzzy concept of intelligence can't be summarized with one simple variable.

>>11765400
>when someone truly intelligent would point its limits and flaws
Says you. My goal in a setting such as this is to defend it from the 'stupid people are smart too' crowd.

>>11765457
>>11765438
You deleted the one with dubs. Low IQ confirmed.

>>11762850
dude there are a ton of normies that are just as impotent and repulsive. you probably dont go outside if you think that normies are all these chad and stacy ubermensch, in fact many are worthy of less than praiseful words.

>>11765457
>>11765466
Enjoy being numbers, quanticucks

>>11765515
you better checkem

>>11765555
damn..

>>11765555
:D

>>11765060
Nice motorcycle impression dude

now is a good time to announce that the OP post is completely ironic and insincere, and that anyone who took it seriously is most likely an NPC. i actually buy into the idea (and similar ones) quite a lot and have done for some time even before i saw them on imageboards. that autistic under/overman is actually a very respectable person and demeaning their struggles or uniqueness in thinking isnt something that anyone should want to do.

>>11762850
if normies are npcs is it morally permissible to hurt them since they lack sentience? are they descartes' animal machines?

how to tell if someone is an NPC. if someone enters a room, a NPC will always look up.

>>11765629
>if normies are npcs is it morally permissible to hurt them
You'll get a chaotic or lawful (depending on how you hurt them) evil alignment, thus making you immoral, meaning it is not morally permissible.

>>11765629
They'll respond and punish you just the same either way, and it can also inflict psychological damage on you to see yourself hurting something that resembles you. Not worth it imo

>>11765719
Oh, and they'll also whup your skinny nerd ass.

>>11762850
I have alts that are a higher level than you

>>11762956
>despite providing no legitimate methodology
Being an NPC means only thinking in images, and not in words. That's a pretty clear methodology.

>>11762850
Those are a lot of fancy words. Unfortunately, they're all irrelevant. The ability to think outside of routine and form a unique thought is more precious than almost anything in this world. It's the underpinning of a human.

>>11766634
How could you speak if you thought only in images?

>>11763089
This. Also it was already pointed out in >>11762904

>>11764615

>>11766647
Look it up, it is a real phoenomenom.

having an internal monologue is a strong sign of mental illness

That's an awfully defensive and bitter post OP
What have the autistic incels ever done to you? Why do you care about their memes?

>>11763685
found the NPC

i am a reflective and abstract thinker but i do not think in the form of an "inner monologue". i hear no voice unless i am trying to come up with written sentences in my head. is it actually useful to train myself to think in non-verbal monologue?

>>11762850
4chan is full of edgy wannabe limp-dick Raskolnikovs who wouldn't even have the balls to pull off something stupid like he did.

It's just another iteration of Rodya's Great Man theory:

The first category, generally speaking, are men conservative in temperament and law-abiding; they live under control and love to be controlled. To my thinking it is their duty to be controlled, because that’s their vocation, and there is nothing humiliating in it for them. The second category all transgress the law; they are destroyers or disposed to destruction according to their capacities. The crimes of these men are of course relative and varied; for the most part they seek in very varied ways the destruction of the present for the sake of the better. But if such a one is forced for the sake of his idea to step over a corpse or wade through blood, he can, I maintain, find within himself, in his conscience, a sanction for wading through blood—that depends on the idea and its dimensions, note that. It’s only in that sense I speak of their right to crime in my article (you remember it began with the legal question). There’s no need for such anxiety, however; the masses will scarcely ever admit this right, they punish them or hang them (more or less), and in doing so fulfil quite justly their conservative vocation. But the same masses set these criminals on a pedestal in the next generation and worship them (more or less). The first category is always the man of the present, the second the man of the future. The first preserve the world and people it, the second move the world and lead it to its goal.

Oh, you needn’t worry about that either,” Raskolnikov went on in the same tone. “People with new ideas, people with the faintest capacity for saying something new, are extremely few in number, extraordinarily so in fact. One thing only is clear, that the appearance of all these grades and sub-divisions of men must follow with unfailing regularity some law of nature. That law, of course, is unknown at present, but I am convinced that it exists, and one day may become known. The vast mass of mankind is mere material, and only exists in order by some great effort, by some mysterious process, by means of some crossing of races and stocks, to bring into the world at last perhaps one man out of a thousand with a spark of independence. One in ten thousand perhaps—I speak roughly, approximately—is born with some independence, and with still greater independence one in a hundred thousand. The man of genius is one of millions, and the great geniuses, the crown of humanity, appear on earth perhaps one in many thousand millions. In fact I have not peeped into the retort in which all this takes place. But there certainly is and must be a definite law, it cannot be a matter of chance.”

>>11766668
no, it is not.
>>11766735
>is it actually useful to train myself to think in non-verbal monologue
this doesn't make any sense, do you mean to think with a subvocal monologue? No. If you mean to think without one, then yes. They're generally only good for writing and having conversations.

absolutely, but i think it also touches on the fact that people are living lives largely devoid of meaning

>>11762850
unironically amen, coming from a stacy who reads 4ch while waiting in line occasionally but literally hates degenerate repulsive gross lgbt abcd owlkin abandonments of society (and their families)

>>11766749

all your pompous bullshit can be reduced to, there are people who had a good family and people who had a bad family, good family people love order and bad family people don't love anything because they are fundamentally broken

everything is just marxism bullshit

>>11766726

Clever NPC, huh

>>11766978
Lol twat, all that "pompous bullshit" was a verbatim quote from Dostoevsky.

>>11762850
yo OP, how much you chargin' for this word salad?

honestly just google "4chan meetup"
even 'reddit meetup' ffs

certain people are only NPCs to you because they don't want to interact with your disgusting ass any further

>>11767090
Lol

>>11767090
and if you're one of the few lonely anons who's not disgusting then they're probabably not interacting with you because you're a complete fucking asshole

>>11763685
Would rather be an NPC than a g*mer.

>>11767113
why would i be lonely you dumb idiot?

oh nvm i realized you're trying to samefag, fuck off. you're one of the dumb anons so please go. thanks. ^_^!

99% of 4chan is a smelly obese mexican who reeks of anime and does drugs

no thanks

and it gets much worse. lol at the trannies... the autists, the virgins. there's a reason for everything.

>>11767125
oh yeah and i have 160 iq according to facebook tests and i get messages from hot single russian girls every day

don't even try me

>>11767127
stinky obese mexican

>>11767130
i'm off but you can keep samefagging, low life :--)!

>>11767133
Sorry man. I wouldn't have tacked on to your post if I knew that it would hurt you because you're an uppity bitch.

>>11767113
Lol

>>11762999
based and nice trips

lol "npcs are normies they aren't capable of thought"

they have funny and intelligent discussions, just not where you are. they do everything you think they don't do. it's just nobody wants to interact, remotely go near, or spend time with an annoying shitlord. it's a waste of time and a waste of life. i would rather not dirty my very soul.

you can revel in your human cesspool though

back to real life where i don't have to surround myself with a bunch of waifu titty mousepad hugging bastards who have nothing of value going for them

damn honestly just searching these picture is too much for me. going to throw up, need eye bleach and not come back. peace out

I'd just like to *dab* on all these punk ass normalfags who think this site for them.
Facebook to down the hall and to the left.

>>11765065
This post is too good for this thread.

>>11762850
This, but unironically

>>11767168
Reminder that 4chan users who meet in real life are faggots. Who the hell uses an anonymous site because they want to meet each other?

>>11764178
>find social relationships that arent reliant on factors outside of my control
Like a waifu.

>>11764615
Imagine the fucking mentality you would require to believe this image is actually what is taking place.
>But call him /pol/ and you will be astonished at how he recoils, how injured he is, how he suddenly shrinks back: "I've been found out."

>>11764798
The people who populate many board on 4chan are in fact well below average.

>>11762850
Read Orwell's rules for writing, pretentious dipshit.

I hate the literary pseuds here.

>>11762904
You can just as well put that entire comic into a thought bubble of another character in the comic.

>>11762948
>a lack of willingness to understand that other people are different and have other priorities to you
This is just the new contrarian answer. If someone's biggest priority is literally eating shit then I'm justified in feeling superior over them because I read books and try to educate myself. This relativism is stupid. People aren't equal. I'm sure my normie friends have fulfilling lives but all they do is play soccer and drink beer.

>>11764492
>Where were you when you realized that Buddhism is weaponized nihilism
Probably at my desk, reading Nietzsche tearing Schopenhauer a new one.

>>11762850
>the NPC meme is just another self gratification tactic for autistic imageboard incels
The goyim meme is just another self gratification tactic for autistic genitally mutilated kikes

>>11762871
So you're saying you want to react to newness of [things people react to], as it lets you be (((trendy))).

>>11764798
This is objectively true, even though the new contrarianism is just pretending everyone is stupid on here. People who find their way to 4chan will easily be of above average intelligence. At least until a few years ago when 4chan was a relatively obscure website. People with a low IQ don't tend to spend their free time browsing the internet. Even "reading for fun" is a completely alien concept to most people, and that includes all the people who only read YA genre fiction.

I think it's fair to say most of us also go to college/university. So that's another environment that selects for above average intelligence (and yes I know it's popular to hate on college today). Society is actually very segregated when it comes to intelligence because even a tiny difference in IQ score translates to very big, different, lifestyle choices. So you (subconsciously) seek to connect with people around your level, and this skews your perception of what "average" looks like.

If you're a male model who constantly hangs out with other male models, you also can't comprehend there are millions of guys out there who can't get laid - because for you and your peer group it's extremely easy. Same principle.

>>11765120
>100 just means what most people got. 100 is always the clear majority.
by your own standards your IQ is 80

>>11762850
yes, but it isn't just incels - this is bias - who take every opportunity to feel like they are more than themselves.

>>11767168
>shitlord
Is your body bloated, is the anatomy closer to a caricature of a pig than that of a human, does your hair take colors indicating toxicity? If so, you are possessed by harmful entities that use your body to breed and to feed.

>>11762850
based (not you, the picture)

>>11767689
>People who find their way to 4chan will easily be of above average intelligence

>>11767772
It might be true, even if most people here are stupid.

>>11767772
People with an IQ lower than 100 don't even understand irony properly. Think they can thrive on 4chan?

>>11767772
I think your disbelief comes from overestimating the intelligence of the average person.

Maybe start comparing 4chan posts to Facebook or instagram posts.

>>>1767736

>>11767736

>>11766634
A picture is worth 1000 words. These "npcs" experience such brilliant nuance take on the world that you'll never know. Npc.

>>11767672
Excatly, my dude, thanks for understanding

>>11767025

that is the issue, you instantly validate pompous bullshit if big daddy literate superhuman said it

you should avoid pompous bullshit even if god himself said it

>>11767816
>>11767841
This. People slightly above average tend to think of themselves as just as smart as those around them, those more intelligent will see a difference but far smaller than what it really is. The contrary thing happens with retards, which think everyone else is more dump than them.

Of course we have our low functioning autists and shills, but on average you can't follow the humour or even memes on most boards if you're not at least something around 110, to scratch the barrel. The meta prevents brainlets from taking root here. Comparing "normie humour" with that on here is really the best example, as humour is the product of your brains calculating power, experiences and ability to mash it all up to create something new.

Something not even half of europeans can, let alone the rest of the world.

>>11766726
found the npc

Women actually select for lack of cognition and sentience. Pretending to be a braindead barbarian who "don't need to understand no concept" is a successful mating strategy.
t. volcel

>>11768094
imagine unironically posting this

>>11768104
They just want bots that carry their shopping bags, give them hugs when they want to and so forth. I understand them perfectly. Having biodrones do what you want, or do what you don't want to do yourself is a useful situation and state to be in.

Suppose women select for qualities they don't want to bother with themselves, and support structures for things they do want.

>>11768112
Quest Accepted

>>11768094
this, self consciousness, impulse resistance and social inhibition are undesirable traits. they want a LOL SO LAID BACK SPONTANEOUS WACKY XDD male who can entertain them. women are dysgenic

>>11768178
Yes, but you're also supposed to impulsively win all of their shit tests. I intentionally fail them in a way that is in no way productive and gloat about it.

>>11768178
>women are dysgenic
That's not what follows. To women, all the high qualities in men are dysgenic. Women are the ape species we evolved from.

>>11768252
its not subjective

much prefer the NPC meme to the boomer meme, tbqh. Reminds me of programming NPC AI in the video games that I make. The key to replicating human behaviour is simplicity and repetition with iteration.

>>11768112
Swap shopping bags with chores and you get more /r9k/ & /pol/ posters though

>>11768281
>more
most of

>>11768178
>>11768252
This is /lit/, nt /r9k/.

Just because you NPS know big words doesn't mean you know what they mean. if yowmen would pick disgenic traits, we would have never come to where we have been. Women pick men which cather to their needs (be it protection, food or luxury) and men in their quest to get their eggs build the modern world to please them. Everything, be is good or bad can be stripped down to men wanting to get into the panties of some women. For fucks sake, the reason the Iliad was written was because of men which couldn't hold their desire for women and their eggs back.

And seeing how most white men are build well, are at least of basic intelligence and humoures, women ver much prefer higher iQ spheres, for the simple reason that a higher IQ, aka the ability to adapt and think through problems, means better possibilities to earn more money and in the end fullfill more of their dreams. Women pick the best men they can get in terms of what is civilisational seen as beneficial. "Disgenic" women act on the fact that the society they live on give them better results from "worse" men, known under the niggers-don't-have-dads- problem because nigresses get more money from fucking nog-chads and getting gibsmedats than buildng a good community and staying monogamous. The same thing happening currently in the west.

In the end not women are "disgenic" but the laws the society (men) make to get them more pussy (better gibs for poor single mothers and retards for example). Just like female liberation was the deed of beta men trying to get good boy points by giving in in them females demands.

Hating on children and women because you raised them shitty is what niggers do. Don't be a nigger.

>>11768312
i didnt say that they always were, i didnt say that it was entirely their fault, i didnt say that the things that govern their actions always have the same outcomes as they do now.

>>11768312
you have to understand the dual mating strategy women have to actually get why they act how they do wrt men
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/comm/haselton/unify_uploads/files/gangestad%20and%20haselton%20current%20opinion%2012-1-14%20in%20press.pdf

basically characterized by a fertile period each month in which they seek out short term partners with specific qualities, mostly the conventional ideas of masculinity, and an infertile phase in which they seek out partners that tick off protector-provider traits.

This is common to a number of mammals i believe, especially our primate cousins.

'dysgenic' is a meme term, in that evolution doesn't care about how you continue to reproduce as long as you do. Civilization itself is massively dysgenic in many ways, but it allowed humans to exponentially raise their population.

>>11763066
underrated

>>11768408
I know the menstruational patterns of mating in many female apes, but you heavily underestimate culture and the "sapience" in women if you think regular IQ women will simply swap their men depending on their hormornal level. This is simply not the case and throught history civilization prevented this by rule of religion.

And the laws to govern women, also mainly came by womens desire to be governed, which is why men did it in the first place. That's also the major reason why the hardest protectors of shit like sharia law in islamic counties are older women. Men merely do their biding.

So no matter how you make it look, calling women "disgenic" is beyond retarded, as they only repond to the world men created in the futile attempt to get better chances at getting on with them.

Civilization might be disgenic but it is only the natural cycle and we're at the beginning of the end of it. Those ble to still reproduce will in the end genetically win, as they will still be represented after what comes, while those spreading such nonsence as those anons above do nothing but make sure that they neither have a fullfilled life now, nor be biologically succesful because they blame women for everything that is bad instead of seeing men as well as women as simply action on each other and therefore beeing both at fault for where we are. And I personally would blame men more for they have the ability to be at the top bell cuve end IQ wise, which women don't.

>>11768462
>if you think regular IQ women will simply swap their men
are you not aware of how women today act from puberty until they feel the need to settle down because they are afraid they are losing their attractiveness? It is exactly like that

And yes we have monogamous instincts as well, im not denying that. SOme people truly do not like being with multiple partners at once, but it is an evolutionary rule that the impulse will exist, for a sepcies with a semi-harem type of mating strategy. We are in between monogamy and harems and our culture and epigenetics dictate what happens in a feedback loop with our environment.

And I was not the anon calling women dysgenic. And blaming women or men is senseless, it is an enormously complex, multi-level historical-biological-technological process which is cosntantly unfolding. Only the most memed of minds would identify some single factor and call it the devil

>>11763178
Does a tree falling where no one hears it make any noise?

>>11768312
>This is /lit/, nt /r9k/.
Women as a rule make decisions that are bad for men. This is not /r9k/. I'm literally one pump away from losing my virginity - and I chose not to lose it. Acting like a barbarian as opposed to acting like a smart guy is what got me that opportunity, and I've hated women ever since.

I do not like women selecting for dishonesty, nor do I like them selecting for barbarianism.

>>11762850
t. NPC roastie

>>11768485
>It is exactly like that
I know women probably better than 95% of those frequenting the chins, I know their downsides just like any MGTOW, with the only difference in staying objective instead of making them look worse than they are just to take away the bame of men.

>but it is an evolutionary rule that the impulse will exist
Monogamy has been used by humans since we settled down, which is something around 100.000 years back in time. Without monogamy a settled society simply can't work, at least not without regular culling of men (be it war or other means). Monogamy, at least in europeans, is deeply ingrained. Without a degenerate society pushing and groomong young kids to already be degenerate, we wouldn't be were people think its outdated.

Even in polygamous (MFF) societies, most live monogamous due to it beeing easier for the average pleb thn aving to deal with a love triangle while sustaining a healthy family.

But at this point, I can hardly follow what your point is to which I was repsonding.

>>11768523
>I do not like women selecting for dishonesty, nor do I like them selecting for barbarianism.
If they would actually do it, you would meet the criteria as tousands of generations would be selected for those traits, Chletus.

>>11768523
>act barbarian
>gets thots
>upset that thots likes barbarian
Try appeal to the correct audience

>>11768312
>if yowmen would pick disgenic traits, we would have never come to where we have been.
Men invented society to escape female tyranny. Women needed good qualities in men prior to modern society. It wasn't possible for them to choose their favored men - the dysgenic ones. Now that they get food from the government (by taxing men who work), they can choose men who don't work - hence the single mom epidemic. Women get to be the whores they are for the first time without sacrificing survivability.

>>11768530
>If they would actually do it, you would meet the criteria as tousands of generations would be selected for those traits, Chletus.
Why do you think I can pass off as such? Men aren't toothless and without their own interest, even if the female perceives them as drones, and actively and passively choose accordingly.
There's a reason women begin to understand property rights only if they encounter the idea of abortion.

>>11768528
I am not a mgtow, or anything like that. I unironically don't give a shit about being cucked, I am just aware that it's a thing, and the dual mating strategy is why.

I have pretty much always instinctively understood women, since I was a kid I got along better with women than men at all stages of development almost. Even now i find it easier, much easier, to talk to women than men, though it is super different than talking like we do on here where we are honest.

>>11768536
>Men invented society to escape female tyranny.
That has to be the most pathetic way of revisionism I have yet seen.

>they can choose men who don't work - hence the single mom epidemic
And who made gibsmedats law? Was it a woman or a man which wanted a bigger voter base? And votes itself, who gave them to them? Who started the abolition of alcohol in america after women demanded it? It was all men which wanted those women, pleb.

>>11768549
Biologically their men interest is reproduction. Everything else eitehr is the path to that or coping. Same for women. What video games are for men, cats are for women.

>>11768556
Well, dual matting also applies to men in their "mary and whore" distinction. They want a virgin wife while wanting to fuck as many women as they can.

>>11768583
>hey want a virgin wife while wanting to fuck as many women as they can.
yeah of course they do but that is fundamentally different than cucking

the real equivalent to cucking is leaving the woman. so all the women who get left by the guy with a random kid, they get burned sort of how the cucked guy does, but it isnt quite as bad because they at least have a kid, whereas cuckguy's evolutionary line dies. (supposing all his 'kids' are not his, if some of them are, we may consider that a compromise between the male and female)

>>11768583
>That has to be the most pathetic way of revisionism I have yet seen.
Where do you think monogamous marriage came from, or the dreaded patriarchy? Society was a male thing, passed on from men to men, like names.
>And who made gibsmedats law?
Women voted for it for the most part, though the earliest instance of it was iirc Bismark, to widows of war and injured. Charity was always a thing, but ever since the "Age of Reason", egalitarianism has been paving way for the state to become a god, and for humanity to be replaceable (=equal) - as has been the case with everything, institutions, machines, beliefs... Heck, escapism itself has replaced fantasy.

State wants easily manipulated voters (=women and low iq people) to grow even larger, promises even more and funds everything through taxation and most of all, loans.
I just hope the loans break these societies apart asap, so I get to see what women are like without state sanctioned mind control. Maybe all I've seen is, in fact, a product of the state feeding the worst aspects of female nature, and not the female nature itself. I'm even open to the idea because I like my wishful thinking. I shouldn't underestimate school and media effects on women, especially now since they spend most of their time on social media.

>Biologically their men interest is reproduction. Everything else eitehr is the path to that or coping.
I agree, mostly. Though there are women who are beneath me who I do 'friendzone' if its possible, or even avoid. There are also functional categories you put women in you don't chase at all, ever. Though oddly enough, those I perceive primarily as the person and secondarily as female. Imagine; there was a time this was supposedly the ideal.
>Same for women. What video games are for men, cats are for women.
Women see their pets as replacement offspring, more advanced toys. Video games are for the play and reward circuit. Replacement life, I suppose.

>>11768583
>They want a virgin wife while wanting to fuck as many women as they can.
Men don't want to swap the mate, they want to increase the pool. Giving them one feeds the need to give to their mate and offspring, and those who are successful in this model are more virtuous, even if the apelike polygamy is a desire. Men also have modes to limit this behavior, such as prioritizing one's friendships more than their dick.

Are NPCs just philosophical Zombies?

>>11768682
That falls off them like water off a raincoat. Call them NPCs and see them recoil.

>those who need to sub-vocalise in order to understand books are objectively inferior to those who have the innate ability to take a more efficient and optimal route to learning.
I was with you until this point OP, what does subvocalizing have anything to do with this?

This thread was moved to >>>/trash/18223146