[Meta] Why are the majority of people so shut off to objective debate?

_Reticent_ · 2014-01-20T03:36:03+00:00

It's simple. When you are broke, you do not want to hear the cold truth about how money operates, about how society rewards those who create value, and about how simply being "good" or "a hard worker" or "talented" isn't enough to cut it. When you are broke, the average person wants to hear about how capitalism necessitates a broke class of people, and because 50% of people must be broke via the law of the free market, you just happened to be in that %, and it sucks to be you. People are keeping you down - and why the hell would you want to provide value to such a corrupt, morally bankrupt system anyway?

When you are IN PAIN, but not in excrutiating pain (aka, broke but still reasonably comfortable working at gamestop)... then it is human nature to seek out some numbing fantasy, some minor escapist bullshit to cling onto.

Most men are in pain. They don't live the lives they want to live. They are pussyless, overworked, caught in lives they didn't want because society said they must accumulate enough status in order to marry a good woman. So they forego the pussy in their teenage and college years, put their nose to the grindstone, turn 27, and realize that they now have their pick... of gold digging whores, post-wall hamsters, single mothers, and ugly girls. The rest are out getting railed. They are told "provide for a girl, then you will be happy!"

So when I say, "Look man, just accept that providing is bullshit, you need to get what you want NOW, without procrastinating it, without paying for it, and without sacrificing your nuts to get it," what happens? This man, who has been told his whole life "you will finally get the happiness if you provide for this girl" freaks the fuck out. His whole life would be an entire fucking lie if he accepted that what I have to say is not only true, but self-evident to anyone who hasn't been drinking the koolaid.

Socrates was KILLED because he wanted people to question things. Because he pointed out flaws in societal roles and expectations, he offended many men by revealing to these men ideas that were so obvious. His method made people feel stupid, as if he was saying "anyone with a shred of intelligence would realize that X is true." When you verbalize the cold reality, the undercurrent of what is happening, you massively piss of BPers. It's like when your friend's girlfriend is obviously cheating on him, and you bring it up as if it is the most obvious, self-evident thing in the world. He will act like you are the bad guy and you will receive all the beta-rage and frustration he feels from being such a chump.

wittywittakers · 2014-01-20T01:29:12+00:00

people generally like to think of themselves as smart and moral.

anything that even remotely questions these assumptions, will instinctively force most people into a defensive hamster mode.

The_CEO_of_Beta · 2014-01-20T06:43:21+00:00

I'd like to share my perspective if it'll help others understand why there is so much hatred/resistance to Red Pill.

Years ago when I was fresh out of college my white knight suit still shined brightly and I would have rejected Red Pill ideas like the rest of the crowd because my life was too good. I enjoyed the peace. I held onto the security blanket that eventually I'll meet the perfect woman but Red Pill is telling me that this peacefulness I'm feeling is a lie.

The Red Pill creates a strong cognitive dissonance for a lot of men who are still blue. It's that uneasy feeling in the pit of your stomach when you want to believe one thing is true but your gut tells that it's not. It's wanting to believe that the girl you're with is innocent, loves you for who you are, and has only had sex with you but that sinking feeling in the back of your head says it can't be if she's 30 years old, or even 20.

It's wanting to believe that the affection and love you show her is given back to you, that all you have to do is work hard and she'll love you back. It's wanting to avoid thinking that she's had sex with a lot of guys who showed her zero respect or care... I mean you had to work hard for her affection so these other men had to as well right?

There are two possible outcomes on perceiving the Red Pill:

Red Pill is just made-up and I can dismiss it without a care in the world. I can continue on with my life as I normally do.
Red Pill is true, and that means everything I've ever learned is a lie. It means I can't trust anyone around me because they've been telling me these falsehoods, and I can't even trust my own knowledge since they're lies too.

Which of these is easier to accept?

The reason why Red Pill is so heavily met with tons of ad hominem is because it becomes a lot easier to reject Red Pill ideas if you can picture the people telling them as being villainous, untrustworthy and/or malicious.

For me personally, Red Pill is important to learn because it gives you those sharp pains like a needle being injected into you. What a lot of people don't know is that the needle is actually vaccination against greater pain. They don't know it because they've never felt it. This greater pain is being betrayed when she cheats on you, dumps you even after years of providing for her, or she makes your life a living hell.

For a lot of men it's too late, they think since they live in so much peace that they'll never experience pain right? I was one of those men. Men like me come to the Red Pill in hopes of rehab, trying to recover whatever part of themselves they lost. Others are not so lucky, it's why four times as many men commit suicide as compared to women.

This knowledge will some day save your life.

2014-01-20T03:54:03+00:00

What changed?

People are generally wedded to their worldviews, because admitting that their worldview is incorrect is also admitting that their life until now has been "wasted". This is called cognitive dissonance. There's a phenomenon whereby dissonance can be broken, it is colloquially referred to as a "reality check". Men get reality checked very early in life -- as soon as they leave school, most men generally learn fast that nobody gives a shit about them and they will have to build a life on their own. Women don't get reality checked until they hit the wall, this is important because later in life it becomes more difficult to break dissonance. It's one thing to admit that you wasted your teen years. Most people aren't going to admit that they wasted 30 years / their entire youth.

An interesting question is why do BP males fail to break dissonance. They may be failing to register those reality checks for one reason or another. Failing slowly with women is very different from having a traumatic event. Other BP males may just be rationalizing their failures... male hamstering.

trplurker · 2014-01-20T01:26:26+00:00

Nothing changed, humans have always been this way. Every great thinking was met with hostile opposition to his, at that time, radical thoughts. Humans don't like change, especially if that change has a perceived negative impact on their tribe. Which goes into another point, humans are tribal by nature. Our instinct is to form social groups with generally recognized leaders, once we're a part of this group we instinctively defend it's integrity. Anyone who is perceived to attack this group, even if the attack is in the form of a debate, is marked an enemy to the tribe.

In our past, the number of men actively attempting debate were far fewer then today and almost all members of some organization or institution that held such debate as part of it's core values. That creates a tribe where it's acceptable to debate and thus you won't be marked an enemy while participating in it. That's no longer the case, the popularity of approved censorship in university / colleges and the creation of the internet have put you in contact with many more people, who aren't members of your tribe, then you would otherwise have.

In society as a whole, the hind brain beats the fore brain.

TheD_ · 2014-01-20T03:56:37+00:00

I've stopped giving a shit what other's believe about x. If they ask what I believe about x, I'll answer earnestly. If they try to shame/guilt me to change my opinion, I'll just double down on what they're trying to manipulate me about.

It's freeing.

TRP-Talk · 2014-01-20T01:31:35+00:00

Consider the millions of formerly religious people who, in spite of the severity of their indoctrination while they were children, unplug from the matrix of their upbringing and adopt a more rational or scientific mode of thinking. This process of metamorphosis is often tremendously beneficial to the person, but nobody would describe the experience as easy. More often that not, there are astonishing social pressures that made such a metamorphosis very difficult for the individual. Not only must they overcome the internal conflict and doubts inherent to having been told as a child that such a course of action means going to Hell, but they may become ostracized from their family, and thrown into an unfamiliar world with very little support.

That anyone in the world is willing to go through such a challenging process in order to achieve a closer relationship to the truth is as powerful an example as I can think of how valuable the truth really is. There are people in the world courageous enough to lose everything they thought was theirs for the dubious possibility that, somehow, the truth will set them free. And yet, in spite of these difficulties, there are no shortage of people who are willing to unshackle themselves from the illusion-show of shadows on the wall of Plato's cave, and make the arduous journey out of the cave and into the light of truth.

You ask, how is it the case that so few people in my social environment give off the impression that they are consciously and deliberately making the journey out of the cave and into the light? Why do I feel like I take this quest seriously, when so many others seem content with the false-comfort of illusion? So few people even seem capable of participating in an objective debate, one in which there is a possibility that they may be wrong! It should be obvious that you are not the first to have noticed that human beings are reluctant to abandon illusion in favour of the bitter truth, even if that means living in a world that makes sense.

I've already mentioned Plato's cave allegory, and you yourself made reference to The Matrix, but I'd like to bring to your attention that Jonathan Swift's thesis in Gulliver's Travels was that human beings have the capacity to embody reason through excellence of habit and conduct, but that in their present condition, human beings fail utterly to live up to their potential, instead choosing to behave like "Yahoos" who use their capacity for reason only to exacerbate and add to the vices Nature gave them.

I'm quite sure you already know why people are so unwilling to take on the challenges inherent to climbing out of Plato's cave. It's very difficult, and society provides so few incentives. In fact, the journey out of Plato's cave is one in which you are beset by a chorus of voices howling at you to stop where you are, to go no further, to go back to the illusions, to stop asking so many questions, to stop being so weird, and if you're exceptionally lucky, you might meet one fellow traveler on his way out of the cave, who has the courage to look back and provide you with the encouragement you need. Better yet, you might be lucky enough to meet a community of people who are interested in teaching you the skills and providing you with the tools you need on your journey. But if you're a boy being raised by a single mother in a feminized society with female teachers who think of you with contempt when they're not indoctrinating you with the female imperative and there are no meaningful role models in your society other than those supposed douchebags who are assholes to women, where are you going to learn how to become a man?

I was reading something some guy wrote about how hard it was coming to terms with the fact that he was schizophrenic. The hardest part wasn't that he had to deal with the symptoms, but that the life that he thought that he was living was in fact nothing more than a delusion. He had built himself an imaginary house of cards to live in, and it was catastrophic to who he thought he was when he discovered that he was making it up the entire time.

There's a term in Jungian psychology called "metanoia", which is defined as "the process of experiencing a psychotic "break down" and subsequent, positive psychological re-building or "healing"" I'm sure you see how that terminology is appropriate for the individual who falls away from their absurd faith and steps into the light of reason, but it can't escape you how going through such a process is a very hard sell for someone who's still plugged into The Matrix. There have been no shortage of threads recently where guys are discussing their beta friends and how difficult it is to get them to see that their own behavior is the source of their suffering. Their own supposed identity is the problem. They are the problem. It's their fault. They are the failure.

Who likes to hear that? Who has the strength of character to accept that truth, and step forward into the light? Most people have to hit rock bottom before they experience metanoia, ya know? People don't realize that when you accept failure, you learn to do better next time. Our society likes to protect people from failure, and so every kid gets a medal for showing up, regardless of how much they suck. Political correctness. Feelings over facts. Because feminism lol.

I think the answer to your question lies in another question. "How nice is it for you to experience failure?"

Does it make you cry and quit, or does it motivate you to get up, try again, and keep climbing out of the cave?

heist_of_saint_graft · 2014-01-20T03:44:34+00:00

'It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.' -- Upton Sinclair

The entirety of Corporate Consumerist Capitalism rests on the back of this lie: "One man, one woman."

Bachelors make for bad consumers. For the most part, men buy things that are useful to them, and replace them only when they break down or when a better tool has obsoleted the first.

Women buy things for adornment, and to "keep up with the Joneses". The whole idea of fashion is a womanly concept: last year's clothes are unwearable now, simply because they are last year's.

A significant number of MGTOW would cripple the consumer economy. Therefore every tentacle of the Corporatist state will do what it can to tether each man to at least one woman. This is what child support is really about -- not "support" of the child, but making sure that men are huffing and puffing on the debt-fueled treadmill that is modern America.

Nemester · 2014-01-20T01:59:06+00:00

Being called closed minded... Leftoids love to do that. They can't comprehend that someone could review the same facts as them, yet come to different conclusions. It is a shaming tactic and a character attack pure and simple.

Basically, the problem is that women are emotional. The default to using emotional arguments much more often than men. Their values focus more on social cohesion and inclusion than on determination of truth. Likely this focus was more useful to them in ancestral communities. As they have achieved higher status positions in society, they have changed the very nature of debate to better suit their natural disposition: appeals to emotion and shaming tactics. This compared to men who value the determination of truth over inclusiveness. Likely also because in a ancestral environment, men didn't have the luxury of entertaining falsehoods for the sake of inclusiveness. Anyway, the following two articles go into detail on the subject.

http://alastairadversaria.wordpress.com/2012/08/07/of-triggering-and-the-triggered-part-4/

http://www.avoiceformen.com/miscellaneous/contrasting-modern-and-post-modern-discourse/

SgtBrutalisk · 2014-01-20T08:12:11+00:00

Just think about this: Africa has never had any real culture. They still live in the most primitive huts. South africa has been a paradise under colonialism but ever since the white people left, it's become a hellhole. Crime statistics have never been as high and people are leaving the country.

Look at what happens in the U.S! By far the most people in prisons are black. Blacks also are the most unemployed, most obese and are the most likely to have STDs. Their average iq is also quite a bit lower compared to white people. And you tell me this is all not their fault? That every race is equal? That somehow white people are to blame for all of that because of "racism"?

Now look at yourself. What's happening inside of your mind at this very moment? Are you angry? Did you rationally think about my arguments or did you just reject them because they are racist? Are you really better than "the majority of people" who are so shut off to objective debate? Or are you just the same, just on another level?

2014-01-20T04:05:18+00:00

People aren't apt to really challenge their own perception until they reach crisis.

Their own apathy holds them back from open mindedness.

sh1v · 2014-01-20T01:29:32+00:00

I can't answer most of your questions as I embraced TRP as soon as I found it. It simply clicked with every experience i'd hvad growing up and being in a few LTRs.

I can say that afterward, contemplating and embracing other non politically correct views becomes easier (ex: the Dark Enlightenment) and I even question those views and TRP. I believe everyone must ascertain truth to the best of their abilities, try on different schools of thought and see whicj agrees most with their observations and experiences. Still the gist, that humans have value and power relative to each other and that women are biologically and psychologically very different from men, is solid -- continually confirmed in my daily life.

mrust · 2014-01-20T02:12:34+00:00

I try to avoid coming to conclusions until the evidence is overwhelming. That lets me keep an open mind about most things. I'm eager to hear rebuttals or counter-arguments. I consider myself a contrarian and will often argue hypothetically taking a position I myself don't believe. There are disadvantages to this kind of approach as well.

I had a hard time convincing my best friend about the red pill. For him every little piece was a revelation. It took years for him to change his views. For me, I was not shocked by anything and just considered everything as a piece of evidence.

Well, it took me much less time to acknowledge TRP, but my friend's frame is much stronger because once he changed his beliefs, he was all in. I'm still on the lookout for alternatives and find it hard to shake certain ingrained beliefs created by conditioning.

To answer your questions, nothing changed for me. I found a coherent model that explained the world better than my existing beliefs and was convinced by its predictive power.

2014-01-20T07:45:26+00:00

This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy. It was created to help protect users from doxing, stalking, harassment, and profiling for the purposes of censorship.

If you would also like to protect yourself, add the Chrome extension TamperMonkey, or the Firefox extension GreaseMonkey and add this open source script.

Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, scroll down as far as possible (hint:use RES), and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.

vengefully_yours · 2014-01-20T08:07:18+00:00

I tend to look at almost everything objectively, find as much information as possible, make a tentative decision, and decide after testing if possible. If I don't have an issue with something, I usually don't think about it. Unless I know for sure, I won't argue the merit of my opinion, as in it has to be based on facts.

I learned from my very first girlfriend what works and what doesn't. Being nice didn't get me anywhere, but being forward, to the point, and somewhat rude did. I didn't have all the pieces yet, but I knew how to work the game to get laid. That meant I made lots of mistakes and missed out on lots of interesting women. Part of me is natural, part of me is learned, but its difficult to tell where each starts or ends. Its been a long time since I was 16.

Some people will stick with what they were first told even while staring at the facts, actual proof can be right there and they ignore it. Its comfortable,people are afraid of the unknown, unless they have a hard core sense of adventure and a curiosity that compells them to know how, why, what, and where. The rest will sit in their deluded or misinformed comfort zone and defend it viciously. Doesn't matter if its religion, politics, feminism, or the bullshit their parent told them to explain something they themselves didn't understand.

They fear change, and they will hamster being wrong into being right in their minds just to prevent cognitive dissonance.

BlueMerlot · 2014-01-20T11:44:50+00:00

Not much changed. My thoughts on this subject was expanded and this sub made me even more interested in it. And funneled the information with enough argumentative bodies surrounding that nothing is ever propped up and put on without some skepticism.

Always willing, if I know what I'm talking about. Even at times when I'm not but have an idea so I can get my misconceptions updated with consistent feedback, like here.

I never wanted my opinions challenged. I thought I was my opinions. I thought they defined me so if I challenged others or was challenged and I failed, it said something wrong about me to a core level. To get over that, I had to learn to separate my opinions from my identity. They're ideas on their own and if one is wrong, it should be exchanged for the correct one and not clung on to or one becomes exceedingly ignorant and foolish.

2014-01-20T11:47:42+00:00

Maybe it's because they don't care enough about you so they avoid any kind of debate/arguing and even talking with you.

2014-01-20T15:36:44+00:00

[permanently deleted]

HeadingRed · 2014-01-20T20:27:55+00:00

It's like the far right\far left. Mr. Leftie sees a lot of people acting stupid and thinks he can fix this if he could only talk to them. Somewhere in the leftie brain is the concept that they have a magic book\phrase\class that will make someone not be a stupid ass doing stupid destructive shit.

Mr. Rightie thinks the problem is we are making the invisible man in the sky unhappy. If we would only do what the invisible man orders us to do, all would be ok.

In both cases in order to continue to functioning with their belief system intact they have to suspend disbelief. These types of minds do not adjust well to change as doing so would bring the house crashing down.

2014-01-22T14:07:47+00:00

You mean on Reddit? Because Reddit attracts that kind of people.

Listen, I have realized the futility of debating on Reddit long ago. This site attracts a huge amount of losers. I mean it is generally defined as a US college student dominated website. So it's full of people paying $100K for a degree in Irish poetry. Kind of hard not to expect them to be losers.

I mean if I was living in the US I would work in the North Dakota oil boom, and study Irish poetry in my spare time if that is my hobby. (I don't, I do ERP in Vienna, different story.)Now, if you can find a website dominated by those people, not college students, that's where you go! And tell me, too, I am tired of this place.

So they just spew the shit politically correct college profs tell them.

I mean, think like this, I mean think like their PC college prof. As I said these people are not smart. Getting in debt for useless degrees etc. etc. But they desperately want to appear and feel smart, because, damn it, they are students, they can't do anything else in life, if they are not smart then what are they? Nothing. They cannot work, they cannot even do housework, and you can't even employ them as security guards because they are about as scary as papillon "dog". They could not even iron a shirt or change oil. So they must feel smart or else they will feel shit.

So basically the college prof goes and tells them X, Y and Z are true and those who disagree are closed minded. So they immediately agree and bask in their glory of being open minded - i.e. smart.

What is fucked up about debating online is that you don't see the person you are talking to. If you would, you would laugh at these people, they would be so pathetic and you would dismiss their views with a joke.

trplurker123 · 2014-01-20T01:52:36+00:00

[permanently deleted]

Title	[Meta] Why are the majority of people so shut off to objective debate?
Author	The_BitterTruth
Upvotes	46
Comments	40
Date	January 20, 2014 12:10 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/TheRedPill
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1vmpbu/meta_why_are_the_majority_of_people_so_shut_off/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/TheRedPill/meta-why-are-the-majority-of-people-so-shut-off-to.10186 https://theredarchive.com/post/10186

Comments