It's Only a Model

This post seeks to help rp theorists better frame field reports and contributions. By "it's only a model", I mean the tenets of rp theory should be skillfully developed, validated, and applied while constantly improving them as we learn more from our own experience and others. As a scholar, I would like to see more rigorous attempts at bringing in theory from real science from economics, social psychology, and more.

The Red Pill is comprised of many different people, all having different experiences and perspectives. This heterogeneity naturally causes inconsistencies and differing focuses, terminology, and goals.

Researchers use models that take various forms and have advantages and disadvantages. Models refer to the abstract representations of phenomena and their attributes, which are used to develop theory. A theory predicts or explains phenomena. This terminology is more or less consistent among hard(think physics) and soft(think psychology) sciences.

So, you can model a person as being alpha or beta based on attributes (do they lift etc.) which affect their SMV. You then develop a theory based on this model. We are done! Nope.

Constructing a theory is difficult. In general, there are three approaches to developing theory: deductive, inductive, and empirical/phenomenological.

In deductive reasoning, one starts with a set of assumptions and combines and manipulates them to form new knowledge/theory. As long as your assumptions are true, the new theory will be true. This is how algebra works.

Let's try some. Let's assume that social proof, that people tend to use others' behavior to indicate what is possible and appropriate, is true. Let's assume that betas hang out with betas. If one of these betas finds rp, then he will suddenly act different than the rest. According to social proof, the other betas in the group will either think the new behavior is inappropriate, or expect it is possible for themselves to change.

In inductive reasoning, one performs experiments to drive theory. This is used in behavioral research, hard science, marketing, etc. While this often involves controlled experiments, it doesn't have to. Feynman proved that passing an electric current through a wire produces a magnetic field. He placed a wire under a compass and re/disconnected a battery to make it change directions.

In an experiment, the things you change are independent variables and the things you measure are dependent variables. We all have opportunity to play around with the way we act and measure how people respond to it.

To develop theory using a phenomenological approach, one closely observes "phenomena", things that happen that seem significant. One looks for patterns first, names them, and slowly begins to form a conceptualization framework to answer "why?". Key to this approach is to temporarily reject all prior conceptualization and just "see" what happens. This forced beginner's mind technique should help you generate many theories, of which a few might still ring true after looking at more phenomena.

Once you have a model or theory, you should evaluate it and explore its contextual bounds. I'll save that for another post.

I encourage all to propose new theories, not just talk about how "red pill is true". Use the three kinds of reasoning to get started. Draw from scientific literature, your own experiences, and observations.