Yes im the annoying guy that keeps posting this under every comment. There has been so much talk about lowering standards or settling for good enough, I really think its worthwhile to bring up the topic. Further more a quick search didnt reveal an oversaturation of posts on this. I dont know what pill this is, this is how I think about things, so probably a balance of blue and red aspects.

Optimal Stopping/Secretary Problem

Optimal stopping theory is an area of game theory.

Optimal stopping theory determines the best time to take an action to maximize reward or minimize cost in sequential decision-making scenarios. One classic example is the "secretary problem".

In the secretary problem the goal is to select the best candidate out of a series of applicants interviewed one by one in random order and deciding immediately after each interview whether to hire that candidate or move on to the next. A rejected candidate cannot be called back.

If the number of total applicants is known, the optimal strategy, derived mathematically, is to reject the first n/e applicants (where n is the number of applicants and e is the base of the natural logarithm, approximately 2.718) and then hire the first applicant who is better than all previous ones. This strategy maximizes the probability of selecting the best candidate.

This strategy balances the need to gather enough information about the candidates (exploration) with the need to make a decision before it's too late (exploitation). By following this approach, the probability of selecting the best candidate is approximately 37%, which is the highest possible chance when compared to other strategies.

How does this relate to dating to settle?

In dating we dont know the total number of applicants. So we wont know exactly, when we have seen 37% of the market, we have access to throughout our life. However, the core notion, that everyone has a limited amount of potential partners to experience, before they want to settle, and that the best partner will be randomly placed within that sequence, will still hold.

We are ofc assuming here, that once you are settled, you actually take it seriously and want to remain settled. Once you settle everyone that comes after is too late. If you settle too early, you will therefore miss the best candidate. If you settle too late, you will miss them too (you will have dated them but rejected them looking for better), every subsequent candidate will then be worse.

The trade-off is to explore sufficiently to know what a good partner looks like, to recognize them when you have them and to actually look at enough candidates to meet them. Yes in theory if you continued dating there may still be a better one, but there also might not be, or it might take a very long time to find them. If you want to have bio-kids, there definitely is a temporal cut-off and youre really looking for the best partner before that time period.

So ideally, explore and experience as long as I have time, assess what matters to you, then settle for the next one that is better than all previous ones. I dont have any issues calling that someone "good enough", I think its a compliment and bears a lot of meaning. Better than all previous ones and good enough to stop looking. Thats a compliment in my book.

Unfortunately, and Im not excluded from this, most people probably wish they would have more opportunity to explore the market and get a better estimate for their personal benchmark. Thats sucky for us, but it is as it is and doesnt change the logic fundamentally. The message is: be realistic, reflect on what matters to you and dont stop too late.

For reference, the median amount of sexual partners, people have in their life is between 2-9. Some people have a lot more, some a lot less, but I would argue that if you had a significant amount of sexual partners, say more than 10, its likely you didnt actually try to date them.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/key_statistics/n-keystat.htm

What this means is that you should probably decide after 2-4 partners, if youre in your mid/late 20s, whether the next one that is better than all previous ones, and if he/she is, that it may be good to settle. I think most people also do this somewhat naturally, as can be see by people shifting from wild and fun to "looking for something more serious" as they approach 30. At least in my experience.

But ignore the numbers they dont matter and how much you can explore before you should start thinking about exploiting depends on you, how much opportunity you have, how much time you have left and how much you care about settling/having bio-kids anyway.

Tell me why im wrong and why its stupid to apply this logic to dating to settle