We must be better men (unironically)
>>24748823Okay, but how?
>>24748852By reading the book, duh
>>24748860I don't want to. Read it for me and summarize.
>>24748852Well obviously we need to establish a utility function and then maximise for it. Actually deciding what a man is, I only know his price.
>>24748823This book was gay as all hell. Reformulated PUA shit that desperately wants to be “deep” and tries to sell performative garbage for getting women as something other than what it is. Gets new age when he talks about what his ideals for men are, and it’s constantly talking down to the audience like they barely know how to read which may indeed be the target audience for this shite. What else have you got?Has anyone even written a serious attempt at this?
>>24748823This book fucking stinks and treats women like they are literal children>If they are acting up or pmsing just hug them real tight or scream really loud in a playful way because they need constant reassurance that you care about them.>If you are being lazy or not working 80 hours a week she will get bored and/or resent you.>women can't help themselves from freaking out for no reason because it's somehow a feminine thing to do that>accountability? what's that?Etc. This book literally put me off dating.
>>24749044but that's basically what they are, honestly
>>24749048I don't want to date a womanchild
>>24749051I've dated seven. AWALT.
Read Rieff's classic. Modern self-help and practical philosophy is invariably boiled down to self-serving platitudes about somehow getting whatever it is you currently just so happen to desire because of the "therapeutic mindset" that dominates modernity. It's also led to the total deflation of all moral education. You see this in the way Buddhist mindfulness practices get strip down and repackaged as "life hacks" and coping techniques to make more money will "grinding." The recommendation to always be working here >>24749044 is typical. Of course, this leaves no time to consider what is actually worth working towards. The decline of the liberal arts and philosophy education in preference for "employable skills" is what would have been considered a servile education the the past. The virtues were considered necessary for freedom. You aren't free if you are ruled over by your appetites or ignorant.But the classics are inaccessible to the modern because they have had a lifetime of indoctrination into liberalism and naturalism. That's where the last column of the pic is helpful, especially Taylor's very accessible A Secular Age, because it shows how the common narrative of "science says this is how the world is," and the ideologies that go along with it are in fact heavily dependent on contingent theological concerns and have little to do with being forced to certain conclusions by empirical facts.Likewise, the idea in political-economy, which dominates self-help, that we are all atomized utility maximizers is every bit as much of an unfalsifiable presupposition (coming from Calvinism originally) as Marxist economics. It is tautological. All behavior from self-sacrifice for strangers to self-harm is said to be "utility maximizing."
>>24748823I know people call this book gay but I actually found it really helpful in learning to understand feminine nature as an incel shut-in. I also like the part where he notes that men don't need women to get the satisfaction of the feminine as we can find it within art and the nature around us. Other than that I don't think I took anything prescriptive from this book but the descriptive aspects were enough to instantly reshape my mind on how I saw the masculine/feminine dichotomy and hooked my attention as a young lad who didn't really read literature.
>>24749051Then date 30+yo single women. They're not as naïve but in turn they're standoffish, jaded, and curt if you don't do everything perfectly.
>>24748920>PUAAnyone who thinks in terms of "sexual market value curves," "emotional labor," "sexual compensation," etc. is going to have miserable and stunted relationships. In particular, they will collapse of they have to raise kids (which these types basically don't, it's a self-extinction ideology).People seek validation through sex but degrade women in their thoughts so that they are incapable of actually giving them validation. Plus, their act only tends to attract women who they won't value validation from. Still, they celebrate their sexual conquests while never questioning the meaning behind the fact that these women will only have sex with them after effectively sterilizing themselves and that even if they conceive they will almost surely murder the child in the womb. It is a wholly sterile act.
Didnt he just rip off Osho?
>>24749098>men don't need women to get the satisfaction of the feminine as we can find it within art and the nature around usyeah and in cute twinks
Why do white people such as David Greenblatt get so infatuated with Hindi principles when the nations that follow these religions all look like pic related?Is this what they want for America/Europe?
>>24749095Sounds like an interesting set of readings. I have read Byung Chul-Han's Burnout Society and have been looking for means of resistance from what it diagnoses. It seems a general trend that we are seen as needing to work and achieve at any and all times in order to justify our existence to either the powers that be or the subjects of those powers, and yet total passivity isn't a solution either (becoming a NEET). I'm looking for alternatives, ones which foster a sense of purpose but don't lead to exhaustion and emptiness. I'd be happy to hear your suggestions.
>>24748823>Mastering [...] Women, Work and Sexual DesireYou are the definition of goy cattle.
>>24749551The aesthetics and marketing are cringe but there's some gems in there.
We are the posters who stepped up.
>>24749243correlation =/= causation
>>24750119This is what reading guns germs and steel does to a mf
>>24749051Then be gay.
>>24748823Book of Pook mogs
>>24750503Book of Pook is just a compilation of forum posts, there's no structure
>>24750732That doesn't make it not better
>>24749243>nations that follow these religionsNext you'll post American evangelicals while mocking Christianity too. The unwashed masses are low iq hylics who don't understand the religion they're following and only perform surface level traditions. Religions studied sincerely and as practiced by the average believers are very different.
>>24750737It does though, plus the book of pook is also hyper focused on dating while the way of the superior man is more philosophical and generally applicable outside of getting your dick wet.
