If your world view has basically no scientific backing, you are probably wrong.

anewleaf1234 · 2026-02-07T02:37:30+00:00

Since you have no science here, we can then ignore all of this, right?

ScruffleKun · 2026-02-07T06:13:19+00:00

If something can’t be backed up scientifically, it’s probably wrong.

Prove that statement scientifically.

Reasonable_Mouse789 · 2026-02-07T07:36:32+00:00

I can say, with 100% certainty, that I am more likely to get sex out of someone by chatting with them for a few hours than I am to ask for it instantly. I don’t have any scientific evidence to prove this than “trust me”

leosandlattes · 2026-02-07T05:55:55+00:00

Hitting the gym is not core to the red pill. The red pill core are a collection of evo-psych theories about male and female attraction/nature.

I guess “take a shower” is core to the red pill too now, since it tells men to be presentable lol.

I think almost all men with red pill flairs on this sub need to have them removed except for the select few who actually know what they are talking about.

Also red pill theories are mostly observational. It’s not really scientific more than it is philosophical curiosity over how heterosexual men and women operate, based on evolutionary psychology.

bondepart · 2026-02-07T09:48:31+00:00

Whenever I’ve seen the red pill quote “science” it’s all evopsych nonsense lol.

Equivalent_Dance2278 · 2026-02-07T07:55:53+00:00

Giving people scientific proof STILL won’t change their minds. The redpill has been debunked plenty. Rollo’s data has been shown to be skewed. Redpill content creators have been caught out lying so many times. And still people blindly follow because it appeals to their FEELINGS! So science proves nothing to a belief.

DankuTwo · 2026-02-07T09:56:25+00:00

The problem is that most social scientific “research” relies on really dubious methodology. I don’t see how people can take surveys and polls and serious, reliable data points. It’s all so terribly unserious.

OkOutlandishness6370 · 2026-02-07T10:04:35+00:00

Seems reductionist to the point of absurdity, OP. You understand that many things in life cannot have scientific backing, but it's still important to make accurate judgement calls... right?

I mean, probably the majority of a person's "world view" consists of moral stances which are inherently unscientific to begin with.

AlarmingArm9919 · 2026-02-07T02:39:57+00:00

yeah but you'd do well to bring up points of your own to facilitate discussion

autistic_cool_kid · 2026-02-07T08:36:21+00:00

The problem with that is that there is no scientific study on what would work for you. Scientific studies do not exist to tell you how to get laid. That's not what science is for and it can't do that. I say this as someone who was a scientist himself.

What we can do and usually do is badly interpreting scientific data to confirm our own biases. That's a RedPill classic.

CelicnisGhost · 2026-02-07T08:50:32+00:00

How are you going to show science to prove most of red pill? Even suggesting a case study on shit tests or whether women care about moral behavior would get you cancelled lmao.

AutoModerator · 2026-02-06T17:54:49+00:00

Attention!

You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
OP you can choose your own flair according to these guidelines., just press Flair under your post!

Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

T4cF0X · 2026-02-07T02:48:47+00:00

I think going to the gym can be both redpill or bluepill behavior. It's really the meaning we associate to events in our lives.

As a purple pilled man myself hitting the gym means I'm doing it to offer the world my gift not expecting any resolution in return. I'm not trying to seek resolve in my lifting. (redpill) I'm not doing it to please women. (bluepill) When I lift it's a gift to myself with no attachments place on it. I often see redpill guys treat lifting like it's a holy sacrament and if you don't do it (right) why lift at all?

One of the truest blue-pill things I have found to be true in dating is that "everything is a man's fault" this is backed up by divorce lawyers, who say the woman is always the one to initiate divorce. All relationships live and die on a man's actions. (sometimes it's inaction) like turning into a fat toad and slamming down Budweiser while never missing the holy NFL Sundays, but he can't be bothered to date her anymore.

I have found purple pilled sources to be accurate. Like Doc Love, Corey Wayne, and Dr Robert Glover.

Science is non conclusive. It's only as good as the repeatable reliable data. Everyone uses science as some political, and spiritual battering ram to prove their worldview. When it's really just a method. The conclusion itself is always subject to change. Such is science.

Bikerbats · 2026-02-07T16:19:03+00:00

This right here is a stellar example of a singular problem that many, many, many dudes here are plagued by. Science has limits, and it's better suited for some things than it is others. So far in human history, it's sucked balls when it comes to explaining, understanding, or predicting human behavior. This sub in particular would do well to embrace the idea that sociology, psychology and psychiatry are not exact sciences, and evolutionary psychology is pseudoscience in its purest form.

Emergency-Sell-6713 · 2026-02-07T21:27:59+00:00

My worldview on women, therefore feminism, therefore the pills, is shaped by myself. Honestly, if I took myself out of the equation and only looked at 80% of other women, I'd be much more conservative and red-leaning. Thing is when I'm fighting for women I'm mostly fighting for myself only and sometimes for the other 20% of women, so...

Lost_Reaction_5489 · 2026-02-07T21:51:46+00:00

Are you aware that a large percentage of studies are redacted and/or updated within 5 years if publication. Are you aware that just because a study says something that real world application may not always map 1:1 that's the nuance of life called living.

EugeneCezanne · 2026-02-11T17:46:47+00:00

Regarding the general principle, I disagree. As someone with a decent academic and professional social science background, the gaps in our available evidence are often too massive to confidently assess any probability of a given proposition being true. We are extremely limited in what sort of things we can study, how directly we can observe them, and how deftly we can fit them into existing theoretical frameworks. What's more, many branches under the broad social psych umbrella are burdened with huge representation and irreproducibility problems. In some cases, like most topics dealing with sex, there aren't even enough researchers out there willing to try.

Most laymen to these fields seem to have a hard time grasping just how big this problem is. The closest analogy I can think of is something like studying Physics in the 18th century--you know some things pretty well, have no clue how much you don't know, and in the meantime lack even the theories to generate hypotheses to possibly disprove some of the total bs popularly believed.

Which runs us into another big problem: most people erroneously believe that some information is better than none. The truth is exactly the opposite. Not only is it epistemically more valid to admit what you don't know, a condition of zero information at least has the advantage of not becoming actively misleading. Lots of information-age public intellectuals have tried to convince the average person of this basic fact--Nate Silver, Nassim Taleb, and Daniel Kahneman come to mind first, from different disciplines--but to little avail in a world where people don't read.

I do however agree that unsupported ideas make for poor arguments. I think the solution is for people to keep their perspectives somewhat conservative* and flexible.

that signing up for a gym was blue pill behavior—despite “hit the gym” being one of the core red pill principles.

Hitting the gym is already mainstream advice for men. It has been for much longer than red pill has existed. In fact, several things typical of red pill are so essentially agreeable as to not really warrant a "pill" distinction. Charitably, Red Pill's innovation, so to speak, is just to say them louder.

a blue pill point

Blue Pill isn't really a thing. It was a strawman created by Red Pill to generally describe everyone else, which now also carries the implied meaning of being anti-Red Pill. I self-identify as BP here as a matter of conversational convenience. Nowhere else, in the internet or in real life, have I found doing so useful even once. A group of people you'd call BPers could gather and talk about dating with absolutely no awareness that we are blue pilled, nor any expectation that we all agree on anything.

But if anyone said "Dress well, show confidence and go to the gym," it wouldn't be controversial.

Theawkwardmochi · 2026-02-12T09:16:15+00:00

like, literally, show anything scientific proving a blue pill point, you cant

Bruh https://www.apa.org/topics/personality/men-women-difference#

And here's something scientific proving a red pill point: https://stanmed.stanford.edu/how-mens-and-womens-brains-are-different/

Point is, if you're gullible enough, you will believe any point "proven" by cherry-picked research.

Reality is complex and multifaceted and many (if not most) correct answers are nuanced and not simple at all. What pills and other ideological bubbles offer is simplified views and emotional comfort, protecting you from the inconvenience of drawing your own conclusions.

False-Purple3882 · 2026-02-09T23:16:01+00:00

Redpill nonsense isn’t rooted in any science, it’s rooted in misogyny. Specifically the “women are incapable of intellectual thought and love being abused” kind.

Title	If your world view has basically no scientific backing, you are probably wrong.
Author	Ok_Cook_3098
Upvotes	2
Comments	75
Date	February 6, 2026 5:54 PM UTC (6 months ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1qxopo7/if_your_world_view_has_basically_no_scientific/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/if-your-world-view-has-basically-no-scientific.1572895 https://theredarchive.com/post/1572895

Comments