Link:

http://illimitablemen.com/2015/02/08/machiavellian-thinking-vs-conventional-logic/

Synopsis:

Be less logical, start being more tactical. Don't justify yourself. Learn the difference between male and female Machiavellianism. Understand why intensely logical men have a harder time socialising and what they need to do to overcome that.

Excerpt:

Contents:

1.) Justification is a Machiavellian Fallacy

2.) Machiavellian Gender Differences

3.) The Logician's Issue

4.) Closing Remarks

5.) Relevant Reading

Justification is for the weak. In the game of power nobody respects he who justifies himself. Within a social fabric where the lowest common denominator prevails; where feelings triumph over logic, and likewise, grandiosity over humility, honesty is but a virtue bastardised. You see, it is the transparency of justification that makes it powerless. Regardless, many an intellectual man's instinctual adherence to logical authoritarianism renders him incapable of determining this. Therefore, when he is tested, questioned, scrutinised and cross-examined his immediate response is to justify himself to his haranguing attacker. Woe befalls him.

Little does he know his challenger's agenda is malicious, and their enquiry, insincere. Such a man haphazardly scrambles to explain himself by demonstrating his thought process. It is in this moment the Machiavellian knows they have won. With widening smile, such a rational yet foolish man can be gamed, intimidated, humiliated and berated. He will be kept on the defence with his own words, for it is they which will be weaponised against him. The more he speaks, the deeper his grave. As Queen Gertrude said in Shakespeare's Hamlet "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." Likewise, he who opts to prove, demonstrate and qualify himself to another with merely and solely the spoken word is perceived as dishonest, pathetic. The justification is not seen as transparent or helpful, but rather as persuasive, deceptive, false - even when it isn't.

With both the playful Machiavellian and the dimwit a sentiment is shared: the more one protests, the more their guilt is assumed. It is thought if one were not guilty then they would feel no need to justify their position. Why? Well of course because their position would "be obvious." Oh the subjective horror! To the idiot and the Machiavellian alike truth is self-evident; it is organic and therefore shows in one's actions. The need to have to say anything about an aspect of one's self, robs it of its naturalness and therefore to the devout Machiavellian, it's charismatic credibility.

Honesty destroys mystery, and with it, the attraction of curiosity. The Machiavellian hates the duplicitous more than most, and yet, respectfully appreciates only the cunning. As such, Machiavellians tend to be in a constant flux of love-hate with their peers. When you are understood, you are unattractive. When you try to help people understand you, they lose respect for you. You're making it too easy. People only value what they work for, be it wages or relationships. Of course, the rational man is often foolish in such social matters.

Additional:

I have a poll on the sidebar of my site trying to gauge the level of interest for a potential future book release. I haven't committed to a book yet, but I'm not exactly out of ideas (I have hundreds upon hundreds of drafts/notes of unreleased material.) So please register your interest I'd appreciate it.

Likewise, I have things I like to write about (predominantly, the dark triad - it's fascinating) but I want to see what's on people's minds at the moment. I have a few monk-mode related articles in rough form/incomplete, but when I get questions such as "what is branch swinging" and "explain AWALT" I start to think I'm going to have to backtrack to TRP 101 just to bring the new guys up to date (which pisses off the guys who've read TRP for years and just want me to focus on religiously writing dark triad articles.)

If you spot any typos, let me know. I've proofread and spell-checked, but shit always manages to slip through.