The Emotional Process

Of the three cognitive, interpretive processes it is the Emotional process that people are most familiar with, and yet it’s also the most glorified when it comes to determining reality and truth. I’m probably going to ruffle some feathers with this essay – people invest a lot of themselves in their emotions. The reason for this is because for a very long time we’ve been taught to deify (sometimes literally) the importance of emotion to the human experience. We want to impart our emotions with a metaphysical quality to the point that understanding those feelings is something we expect our omniscient Gods to have a relation with. This is the mythic apex of the grandeur with which we regard emotion, but on a visceral level, the opposite end of that understanding, emotion is something very understandable and very ‘knowable’.

We interpret stimuli via the Emotional process, but we also express our emotional state through art and personal means. And this is the dual nature of emotion; it’s interpretive, but those interpretations are subjective to an individual. As such, these interpretations and expressions become part of our personality and identity. I’ve mentioned the concept of ego-investment in many prior essays. A person can invest themselves so much (ego) into personal beliefs that they become a component part of who they are. Thus, an attack on the belief is literally an attack on the ego, but’s important to point out that those investments are integrally linked to the Emotional process. Emotion is not just an important filter through which we interpret the world, but its effects often shape us as individuals. So because of this subjective, ego-investment dynamic it’s hard not to step on a few toes or challenge the emotionally-inspired belief sets by considering emotion in an objective way.

As with most other aspects of Red Pill awareness. parsing out the nuts and bolts of how and why emotions work, how they evolved and the important survival functions they serve often has a way of dispelling the magic we apply to emotions. From a biological perspective we can prompt certain emotions (or buffer them) by creating the stimuli that evokes them. We can chemically induce an emotional response. We can alter moods with drugs and we can chemically compare the endorphins released into our bloodstream when we experience the ’emotional’ effects of love, lust and infatuation. There are many studies comparing love to addiction, and the effects of a breakup being comparable to ‘withdrawal’ symptoms.

Emotion has prompted virtually all of mankind’s greatest art, music, literature and so many more cultural effects it’s hard to think that emotion doesn’t define us as a species. Emotion has started wars, prompted self-sacrifice, moves us to mercy, ensures that our children are nurtured and sees that we care and cooperate with each other. Emotion is a blessing and a curse as environment and circumstance demand, but for all of that the Emotional process is a result of our evolved biology. Emotion is firmly rooted in our evolved capacity to experience and interpret our environment and circumstances. Emotion is rooted in the physical. And while it inspires us to acts that may seem divine or diabolic the fact remains that emotion is very much dependent on our evolved capacity to physically experience it.

I begin this essay stressing this point because the concept (not the process) of emotion has been elevated to such a mythic degree of importance in our present times that it supersedes almost all other considerations in life. We’re largely taught and conditioned to prioritize the importance of our emotional states above both the Instinctual and Rational processes, so to reduce emotion to a physical dynamic runs counter to what we feel it should mean to us. Unless we’re dealing with a clinical, physical depression we rarely consider that emotion is an interpretive process. We want to apply meaning to emotion rather than see it as the evolved tool it is to human beings.

Both Instinct and Reason influence and modify the Emotional process, and like both, Emotion is interpretive and functional. If we look at base emotions we can make inferences as to what their latent purposes might be. In the first post of this series I drew the lines between the effect of oxytocin inspiring feelings of trust and caring, and how the environmental prompts that trigger this hormone have a practical ‘real world’ function. We can speculate that the instinctual prompts that trigger the oxytocin then lead to the emotional processing of the feeling of trust/caring which then prompts physical behavior (nurturing a child, etc.) Hunger is another good example. Our physical state of hunger prompts feelings of anger or discontent which then compels us to action. In our evolutionary past this anger prompt would’ve been beneficial in that it motivated us to seek/kill food.

Those are just a couple of the many different basic prompts for the Emotional process, but emotion is much more complex and nuanced than this. The Emotional process is multi-layered, so when you combine various emotional interpretive processes with emotional responses you get various new iterations of emotion which then builds into more complex emotions. While instinct is the fastest of these processes, emotion can be more time intensive. Base emotions are relatively quick interpretations (though slower than instinct), but the more complex, compound emotions take time to interpret, build and then reinterpret. Because of this compositing process humans have a tendency to fixate on the emotion itself as being of primary importance; often forgetting or dismissing entirely the stimuli that originally prompted it. Furthermore, we forget or dismiss the latent purpose of that initial emotional interpretation that caused that composite cascade of emotions.

An understanding of this emotion compositing is necessary to understand why we tend to imbue emotions with such importance and power. While base emotions are linked to the ‘fast-twitch’ Instinctual process, the more complex emotions – the ones we subconsciously craft over more time – tend to be the ones we build belief sets around. This is very important to Red Pill awareness because it explains the motivations for, and foundations of, feminine-primary belief sets of both men and women, as well as the feminine-primary social order that is a result of those belief sets.

Gender Differences

Despite all the protestations of egalitarian minds, men and women are fundamentally different. Biologically, neurologically, endocrinologically and psychologically our gender-specific differences are significant. This isn’t a revelation to my Red Pill aware readers, but it’s a radical statement for the past generations who are emotionally invested in the idea of a blank-slate parity between the sexes they’ve been conditioned to believe is true. As I mention above, an ego-investment is component part of the personality of the individual so invested. To attack the investment, the belief, the ideology, the educated-but-misinformed opinion, is to attack the person. That belief set, like the emotions that compounded to develop it, is subjective to the individual experiencing the emotions that led to it.

One presupposition that has been a part of the manosphere for as long as I’ve been a part of it is that women put “feels before realz”. In several essays I’ve made a case for women’s innate communication style being context based – women focus on how the communication makes them feel; the information conveyed is secondary. For men this is reversed; men prioritize the content (the information) of the communication and the context is secondary. I’ve written a lot about how each sex evolved into their communication priorities, but down to the biological level, per our sex, the answers can be found in how our brains differ.

There are many multivariate studies that reveal similar findings and brain imaging, and the uncanny complementarity between men and women’s brains. For the most part studies indicate that women tend to prioritize the Emotional interpretive process above the Rational interpretive process and vice versa for men. That is not to say women are entirely incapable of reason, nor does it imply that men are emotionally stunted. What I’m suggesting is that our innate, biological predispositions prioritize our interpretive processes to emotion in women and rationality in men. Women can be taught to prioritize reason over emotion and, as I’ll illustrate next, men most definitely can be taught conditioned to prioritize emotion above their innate reason.

There are also numerous studies on how these interpretive prioritization function as a result of neurological gendered differences in men and women. Women process negative emotions differently than men. Men largely lack the brain architecture (wiring) to process emotion in the same manner and with the same degree of prioritization as women do. This is simply how we’re built, but before any woman pops off about their ‘superior’ emotional capacity, bear in mind, women’s brains are not wired for the rational and spatial tasks men’s brains are more suited to. Out of the womb, a boy is predisposed to throw an object with greater force and more accuracy than a girl. And that’s just one easy illustration of the mental firmware men are born with.

None of this, however, is about one sex being superior to the other’s innate predispositions. It’s not a contest, it’s just about which disposition is better suited to a task. But still, the first inclination today is to presume women’s greater emotional capacity should be the normative in our present-day feminine-primary social order. For the past 60+ years we’ve lived in a social condition that has made every attempt to feminize men; to get them more in touch with their emotions – to condition men, despite their brain wiring, to prioritize the Emotional process above both instinct and reason.

To reiterate, women are not necessarily handicapped because the Rational process isn’t their innate, predisposed preference, but neither are men handicapped for lacking the interpretive hardware to prioritize the Emotional process as women do. That said, for the past 4-5 generations we’ve lived in a social order that has presumed a blank-slate equalist perspective of men and women. We live in a time when men not emoting like women is a disorder to be treated and conditioned. We presume today that boys are defective girls because they don’t prioritize the Emotional in their communications or their interpretive process. Today the Emotional process that women innately prefer is the ‘correct’ way for all, egalitarian, blank-slate equals to prioritize their interpretations of the world and each other with.

As most of my readers already know, I see the presumption of equalism as being little more than a cover story for feminine primacy. For several generations now, and especially since the Sexual Revolution, the pretense of gender equality has been the vehicle for female social primacy. At first it was subtle and inoffensive, but today this social engineering effort is out in the open. And with more and more empirical evidence mounting that proves the sexes are far less “equal” in nature than prior egalitarian doctrines would allow anyone to accept, we see an intensifying effort to retain the social narrative on the part of equalist. Only now it’s focused on the innate ‘wrongness’ of masculinity by demonizing and pathologizing anything conventionally masculine. This new intensive effort is only able to find legitimacy because prior feminized generations base their belief sets on the the inherent ‘correctness’ of prioritizong the Emotional process – a process that is fundamentally, biologically linked to women’s preferences in interpreting the world around them.

So today we look at men as if they’re stunted and ‘wrong’ for communicating with other men in a way that prioritizes information before how it makes them feel. We still today implore men to get in touch with their feminine sides – the last vestige of Car Jung’s bastardized and now disproven animus theories – but pity men for lacking the hardware to emote ‘correctly’ like women. We don’t teach boys emotional control because in our emotional-prioritizing social order anything that looks like control seems like masculine oppression of emotional expression. Instead we create new, more intense, ways of discouraging men of ever embracing or “getting in touch” with their masculine sides. We discard masculine discipline for emotional pretense. We teach boys at younger and younger ages to fear and despise their innate masculine selves. We create programs to cure masculinity as if it were a health crisis. This effort will only intensify as gender differences become more and more unignorable and the social engineering of the last 60 years becomes more obvious.

As a basis of that cure is the fundamental presumption that interpreting our world through the filter of Emotion should supersede or entirely disqualify the Rational interpretive process. As you might guess, men’s innate predisposition is to interpret our world through Reason. Today we live in a world where feelings trump both instinct and reason. This is why the current generation makes the Emotional process and their feelings more important than any other consideration – they are the cumulative result of having prioritized women’s emotional preferences above all else, while simultaneously engineering consecutive generations of feminized men to facilitate it for the last seven decades.

In the next and final installment in this series I’ll be addressing the Rational interpretive process and how we might imagine better future generations based on seizing and instituting a social order founded on masculine reason.

452 comments

  1. It’s time to reclaim our culture. Let’s continue to openly ridicule these Equalist wanks knowing to the pit of our souls, to the last man, that truth is with us.

  2. @Yollo. Spoken like a true keyboard jockey.

    Read the whole post bedore making ridiculous comments about starting a new male sexual revolution.

    The takeaway from this is to recognise patterns now emerging in society and adapt one’s own behaviour accordingly.

    It’s become clear through popular media,education and legal/political structures that men are becoming more feminised by failing to understand their own innate instincts and are becoming more emotional under pressure by push for “equality” which Rollo points out is really a cover for women to gain the upper hand—-female primacy.

    The problem is that when men give up those masculine traits it becomes harder to get them back….

    It goes something like this: feminists want men to show more emotion. Men start to act more emotional….women complain that there are t enough real men in the world….men take charge and then act out in uncalibrated ways…then comes #metoo.

    The common theme here is men are reacting, they’re following instead of understanding the role emotion plays in their psycho-sexual relations.

  3. @walawala

    Yeesh I never said I was going to start a new sexual revolution. That said, I hadn’t considered that angle on this. Men are reacting, and it’s screwing them. Okay that might be true. Thank You.

  4. @Rollo: I think this is a good article for something I often ponder about. Arguably, the best life goal for anyone is to “feel” happy throughout life (short or long life) – basically maximize happiness.

    The means to that end will vary of course depending on the person, but truly what else is there? Family, friends, helping, hobbies, wealth, work, are all arguably means to that end through different sources of fulfillment.

    Someone that is religious might have a different viewpoint due to considerations of an afterlife… But even that could be recast as feeling happy they are living a virtuous life that will be rewarded eternally.

  5. More mind candy.

    “Emotions stem from attitudes, therefore you should change your attitude in the first place. Feelings and emotions are nothing but consequences. They are caused by one single thing, importance.”
    ― Vadim Zeland, Reality Transurfing 1: The Space of Variations

  6. “ Feels before reals” only works in times of abundance and prosperity.

    Watch how quickly these pampered, pandered to ho’s come to heel and attach themselves to real masculine (toxic) men when the shit hits the fan.

    Fuck feminine primacy,
    Deal with reality or reality will deal with you cupcake!

  7. @Yollo the takeaway from all this is understand what triggers your emotions and learn when to react authentically.

    “”From a biological perspective we can prompt certain emotions (or buffer them) by creating the stimuli that evokes them. We can chemically induce an emotional response. We can alter moods with drugs and we can chemically compare the endorphins released into our bloodstream when we experience the ’emotional’ effects of love, lust and infatuation…””

    You’ve heard: “It’s the booze talking…”

    One key issue i see is that a whole new generation of guys…the Soy Boys….are learning ways of coping and reacting that totally run contrary to their biological pre-disposition:

    It’s ok to giggle like…well girls..

    It’s ok to pout and sulk…like…well girls used to do…

    It’s ok to cry…complain…etc because well, equality.

    Except that’s not the case because what do you generally here when guys act this way?

    “He’s not very masculine”—I hear girls saying this in various forms.

    This essay is the most nuanced and complicated of the series.

  8. Trigger Warning to Females and Soy Boys:

    “In the next and final instalment in this series I’ll be addressing the Rational interpretive process and how we might imagine better future generations based on seizing and instituting a social order founded on MASCULINE REASON”

    Yes, please.

  9. Excellent essay tying together the biological fundamentals and the basis for the wrong direction society is heading towards. If only the essence of this topic could be disseminated into the mainstream past thoughtpolice censors.

    But then again, this train of though is entirely too logical… needs to be translated into cat-speak.

  10. “To attack the investment, the belief, the ideology, the educated-but-misinformed opinion, is to attack the person.”

    Domesticated dogs were once singularly utilitarian. Then Ol’ Yeller comes along and they assume a place in the family picture.

    Try speaking rationally about a persons dog…pet greyhounds perhaps.

    Just this AM: Senior staff, rational guy, talking about his recently dead dog. He spoke how one would kindly lick peoples faces and was all-around swell. Me: That licking is a puppy-learned behavior to get you to puke a predigested meal in its mouth, as it did to its mother who fed it that way.

    Him, deflated a little: Oh, he was trying to get a free meal.

    Me: Nature is unemotionally utilitarian, yes.

  11. @EH:

    “Him, deflated a little: Oh, he was trying to get a free meal.

    Me: Nature is unemotionally utilitarian, yes.”

    Haha … you burst his lurve bubble. He will never be the same again.

  12. Lacking emotion of understanding thereof makes a man, a fully masculine man, incomplete.

    Computers and machines are rational 24/7. Hello skynet. The answer to over emotionality isn’t all out constant reason and rational. Avoid extremes and remain complete.

    I’ve met many emotionally dead people in life who wore their dysfunction as a badge of courage. I can’t imagine what living just be like without any creative ability whatsoever, or any visceral appreciation for same.

    Mine the extremes, and remember that anger and indignation are emotions.

  13. walawala
    “The common theme here is men are reacting, they’re following instead of understanding the role emotion plays in their psycho-sexual relations.”
    https://bit.ly/2FqTzyK
    Yeah that’s on point. Everything is happening faster and its getting harder to interconnect learned responses over the course of stages of development. Maybe the internet makes it so convenient to fail and re fail from the same past errors of the past. Being a child and becoming an adult had trials and attention from people who used to have 1 – 4 human ratio of model relationships.
    In today’s family dynamic its barely 1-1. https://bit.ly/2HInx36 I wonder if the approach in the SM place has helped curtail behaviors that are what re creates the species while at the same time removing what dosn’t work. Its as if the world has become more disconnected with the internet because the most important filter’s have never been set up by any member of a family unit from the start. https://bit.ly/2JKl0WD Nature only wins when you destroy the lesson’s from teaching you what Acting means from the inside out and not outside in.
    Red pill embodied self acceptance and life choices and habit’s. Acting by leading and than leading by acting faking until you make it but being ok with knowing you won’t ever escape troubles. Just learn how to better manage them while removing self destructive behaviors that bring you in a more reactive mode. Built a fire last Saturday with my Newphew. its as if he wants leadership he dosn’t have a farther and has reactive tendency’s from his mother.

  14. @ Rollo – “A person can invest themselves so much (ego) into personal beliefs that they become a component part of who they are.”

    …..drink so much of the koolaid that they become the koolaid.

    This is an extremely fascinating post and very well written. I’ve just began reading it and can tell it will be one of your best. There are a lot of guys writing about red pill, hypergamy and so forth on the internet and elsewhere. But you are the most detailed, thorough, painstaking and least superficial of all. You are in a class alone, unique and singular. Really, you have evolved into somewhat of an authority on the subject because you have taken the time and applied your mind more objectively and carefully than any others I’ve read. So many things you’ve written, “ring true” (some of which, I must admit, rang true for me only after I slowed down and reread your work with a more honest mindset).

    Have you ever considered compiling all you have done so far, combine it with further research and write a more comprehensive book to include the physiology, evopsych, culture, history, etc. showing how it all interrelates?

  15. @ rugby

    Men as you nephew, must be built, women just become. Both sexes lose when men are adrift.

  16. The key is relating to and processing emotion as a man does, not as a woman does. That’s the point of this article really.

    The problem today is that men are told to process emotion as a woman does, even though they do not have women’s brains, due to blank slate thinking which is false biologically. As a result, we end up with many straight guys who act like they are gay, more or less — straight fags I call them. Lost in space, really, when it comes to how to be men.

  17. rugby11
    May 1, 2018 at 7:07 am

    Failing and refailing is an inherent part of human nature. Patterns once established are VERY hard to change.

    Iron discipline is necessary. Either self supplied or external (if you can surrender enough).

  18. “Without emotion you can’t make decisions.”
    Robots can make decisions.
    But it is probably a lot more difficult to make socially intelligent decisions without emotion.

  19. walawala
    May 1, 2018 at 1:52 am

    Avoid “authentic” reaction at all costs. Only react to emotions you want to. And darned few of them.

    All responses to emotions should be rational. Those can become automatic with practice.

    Emotions should be treated as signals not directives.

  20. anon
    May 1, 2018 at 7:55 am

    “Without emotion you can’t make decisions.”

    There is a brain condition that makes people unable to feel emotions. Such people can’t make decisions. You can look it up.

  21. A few years ago, neuroscientist Antonio Damasio made a groundbreaking discovery. He studied people with damage in the part of the brain where emotions are generated. He found that they seemed normal, except that they were not able to feel emotions. But they all had something peculiar in common: they couldn’t make decisions. They could describe what they should be doing in logical terms, yet they found it very difficult to make even simple decisions, such as what to eat. Many decisions have pros and cons on both sides—shall I have the chicken or the turkey? With no rational way to decide, these test subjects were unable to arrive at a decision.

    http://bigthink.com/experts-corner/decisions-are-emotional-not-logical-the-neuroscience-behind-decision-making

  22. “That licking is a puppy-learned behavior to get you to puke a predigested meal in its mouth, as it did to its mother who fed it that way.”

    You mean we’re not supposed to be puking our predigested meals into our dog’s mouth? Oops…now you tell me.

  23. “You can look it up.”

    Word. It’s on the interwebs, it must be true. Research dudes are smart, yo.

  24. @ Rollo – “A person can invest themselves so much (ego) into personal beliefs that they become a component part of who they are.”

    You stated this truth early in your work and have reinforced it numerous times. I think it is fundamental to your pursuit. Your first book began with “There is no “one” – “the one” of which is itself an ego investment. The way you teach this, is a wonderful way to encourage people to question themselves in a positive way and question their beliefs, so they may improve their comprehension of themselves and how they interrelate to others.

    Our culture conditions us to believe that separating, compartmentalizing, categorizing, quantifying, qualifying, finding patterns and consistent associations, constitutes “progress”. Reliance on the “scientific” method is so ingrained and conditioned into us that we literally believe it is the origin and agent of all progress where progress is defined by constant improvement in human life. This belief certainly is effective for achieving various goals, like landing a man on the moon. However, history proves it is arguably ineffective at improving human life in the context of increasing general satisfaction or happiness for most people. One reason for this, I believe, is because many social “researchers” or “dot connectors” loose respect for (or never had respect for) two dangers associated with the general philosophy.

    First, most tend to at least some extent ignore the core human aspect. I define the “core human aspect” as that aspect about each individual of us who is completely separate and unique. No person experiences my life other than me and it is the same for you and each and every other person. We are each separate and this separateness forms the essence of our freedom. Not to get off on a tangent here, I want to show that in order to analyze ourselves or each other, we must in a sense, mentally separate ourselves from our “core human aspect”. In order to objectively examine ourselves, we must in a sense somewhat temporarily divorce ourselves from ourselves. The danger here is that we loose respect or empathy for the “core human aspect” and in doing so, risk misleading ourselves and others and not improving, or “progressing” at all.

    Second, the “scientific” method is realistically effective when used to discover how various phenomena actually relate to each other but a destructive waste of time when it is corrupted with unproven associations and conflations. When a thinker or “dot connector” conflates rather than relates (due to ignorance, intellectual laziness, or by design to exercise fraud) the process is corrupted and nothing improves generally.

    I think you are doing an excellent job of maintaining empathy and relating these phenomena rather than corrupting the dot connecting with conflations and loose associations. Thank you for fighting the “good fight”. You could give a man a fish and feed him for a day, but you are teaching men to fish so they can feed themselves for a lifetime.

  25. @Rollo @Blaximus
    Lacking emotion of understanding thereof makes a man, a fully masculine man, incomplete.

    In his book, Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain (first published in 1994) one of the world’s top neuroscientists, Antonio Damasio, profiled his patient, Elliott, one of his most well-known cases. Formerly a successful businessman, model father and husband, Elliott suffered from ventromedial frontal lobe damage as a result of a tumor and subsequent surgery for removal.

    Following his operation, Elliot dispassionately reported to Damasio that his life was falling apart. While still in the 97th percentile for IQ, Elliot lacked all motivation. His marriage collapsed as did each new business he started. Damasio found Elliott an “uninvolved spectator” in his own life, “He was always controlled. Nowhere was there a sense of his own suffering, even though he was the protagonist. I never saw a tinge of emotion in my many hours of conversation with him: no sadness, no impatience, no frustration.”

    It was clear to Damasio that as a result of his surgery, Elliot was incapable of making decisions, “Elliott emerged as a man with a normal intellect who was unable to decide properly, especially when the decision involved personal or social matters.” Even small decisions were fraught with endless deliberation: making an appointment took 30 minutes, choosing where to eat lunch took all afternoon, even deciding which color pen to use to fill out office forms was a chore. Turns out Elliott’s lack of emotion paralyzed his decision-making.

    I think there’s something subtle that this series, otherwise great, misses. I won’t pretend I know how to fix it, but here is some food for thought.
    (Nb. Anonymous Reader covered the instinctual part pretty well, @Rollo I think it’s worth attaching his comment to the previous instalment of your series: https://therationalmale.com/2018/04/23/the-instinctual-process/comment-page-2/#comment-249306)

    I’ve said it before and it’s worth repeating: emotions as such are body changes/(re)actions to certain stimuli. When you’re afraid, your heart beats faster, eyebrows lift up, skin turns pale and muscles contract. When you’re angry, your nostrils dilate, eyebrows are pulled down, teeth clench and you’re ready to act. When you’re aroused… etc. etc. There’s nothing inherently wrong with emotions. They are there to keep you alive. They are healthy.

    Then we have feelings which are representations of emotions in the brain. This is how you feel your body, how your brain perceives it, its physical state and changes. Because they are at the brain end of the process, feelings don’t have to result from the body’s reactions to external stimuli. Often they are stimulated by your thoughts, like when you watch a movie or think of an emotional moment from your past. Similarly to emotions, there’s nothing inherently wrong with feelings, they are there to keep you alive. Still all good.

    Now, there are many important RP lessons in this context. I’ll mention only two.

    First, because woman’s body is different, her brain needs to be different too to better represent, react to and support her body and its imperatives. Just imagine how much happens throughout the menstrual cycle alone. It’s a physical and biochemical roller coaster /\/\/\/\/\/\. Its all emotions (body changes/reactions) and the brain tries to catch up and keep the owner up to date (fell it woman!). Hence the feelings that constantly change and we can only roll our eyes. It’s just biology of their bodies that causes it. The brain is a servant of the body that evolved to expect and be tuned to such roller coasters (it’s all good then!). They feel they’re alive when they experience /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\. It’s also why female minds are inward focused (solipsism).

    Second, it is important to think about masculine emotions (states/reactions of the male body), understand how they make us feel, and know when something is missing. We talked about DRIVE – it’s something physical that your body creates/needs and that’s why you feel it. If you don’t and you’re constantly weak, indecisive, without any need to do something – check your body first and foremost. Emotions are extremely important for decision making. They are an inherent part of the Dynamic, Passionate and Authentic lifestyle. You get angry, you get horny, you want to fight, conquer, create, discover. You want to feel all these, torque included.

    Rollo is doing a great job debunking social conditioning that tells us how and what to feel. Distancing ourselves from emotions and feelings is not a solution though. It makes the rational process just another form of incel hamstering and buffering. Inaction. Lack of emotions or their suppression cripples men. Elliott from the quote above is just one example, but it doesn’t have to be because of a brain damage. Watch your dog logic and manstering levels.

  26. @anon
    “Robots can make decisions.”

    I disagree. Only “deciders” are capable of making decisions. Real decisions can only be made by an entity that is free to make a free choice. A robot is not a decider, it is a preprogrammed machine. The programmer decided what the robot will or will not do. The robot has no choice as its “thoughts” and actions are designed by its manufacture. There are no other forms of robots, all are manufactured by man and programmed by man and only capable of acting out that which they are designed and preprogrammed to do no matter how complicated the process. If you say otherwise, then your nose is growing. If you consider yourself to be a biological physiological robot, then you are not a decider but merely a preprogrammed entity performing a series of predetermined thoughts and actions based on predetermined reactions to external stimuli and internal stimuli that was predesigned and installed within you.

    It is time for Pinocchio to become a real boy.

  27. M Simon
    May 1, 2018 at 8:10 am

    http://bigthink.com/experts-corner/decisions-are-emotional-not-logical-the-neuroscience-behind-decision-making
    =====================

    Intriguing — but “emotional” is a large system with several components.
    Article a bit like: “if you mess with a car — it won’t go.”

    Would have been nice if there was specificity e.g. where is the lesion.
    Several areas considered emotional vital for cognition/decision also.

    That’s why lobotomies “worked” — but folks became cows.

    Also does not explain why it is that psychopaths – which by functional neuroimaging do not activate regions of the brain critical to emotion (medial prefrontal cortex; amygdalae; orbitofrontal cortex) nonetheless have no difficulty deciding and acting.

    Not discounting; just now intrigued.

  28. From descriptions of the experience, it seems the psychopath decides and acts unburdened by emotion. The decisions and actions are, if anything, freed of constraint.

    There is no internal self-recrimination “oh I shouldn’t do this because it’s wrong” guilt, and no fear of consequence. Have heard the experience described as the psychopath cannot be brave or courageous, because there is no fear in the first place that must be overcome.

    Of course, these are all extrapolations – we have the brain we have, and cannot really know what it is to be psychopathic or normal – because we are not what we are not.

    Of note, it is neurophysiologic: because of the wiring, the psychopath heart rate, blood pressure, body temperature runs below the average.

    These are, literally, “cold blooded.”

  29. @Rollo
    I came across this phrase in this essay: “And with more and more empirical evidence mounting that proves the sexes are far less “equal” in nature than prior egalitarian doctrines would allow anyone to accept”
    I would love to have access to more of this information from definitive, reputable sources (aside from Hazelton). I’m a big believer in this, but I do enjoy having this proof “on-hand” to respond off-the-cuff to people who question this reality.

    Cheers, and keep up the great work

  30. If I could recommend only one RM post to a Blue Pill buddy, this might be it. This strikes me as the core of the Red Pill. If one can accept this premise, everything else on this blog falls into place. Almost all the conflicts between the Red Pill and the FI can be boiled down to whether or not you accept this inherent difference between men and women.

    Well done, Rollo, and thank you.

  31. @jtmcmahon

    The true psychopath has a damaged or altered amygdala, which is what controls the emotions. They lack empathy altogether because they cannot make the emotional connection needed to feel it. They often fill that void through their ability to tap into the emotions of others, read them, and manipulate them, making them very controlling and very dangerous, appearing to be empathetic and helpful while they are really being selfishly manipulative. .

    It can manifest in children, usually a warning sign is abuse of animals or pets. There is a reported case of a five year old who was caught trying to drown a pet. When confronted she denied it, then she tried to do it again, and denied it again, without emotion, as if she had done nothing at all.

    Some were murderous: Eric Harris at Columbine, Robert Durst (subject of the HBO show “The Jinx”), Ted Bundy. Also that chick murderer, Jody Arias.

    Some were not killers, bur used their talents and did enough damage: Bernie Madoff. There is a continuum of behavior, some more intense then others. There is some evidence the tendencies “cure” themselves, or become less virulent, as the psychopath ages.

    When cornered, and their game exposed, their wheels come off, they can become violent and bullying, their attempts at logic fail as the stories make less and less sense, being improvised on the spot, without regard to facts. When forced to deal in the factual world, their manipulations no longer work unless they can distract the attacker back into an emotional trap.

    Several sources explain this, but the most obvious explication is in Robert Cullens’ exhaustive reporting on Columbine. A full book chapter is set aside for the subject to explain the workings of Eric Harris’s mind in particular.

    One of the items of the so-called PUA dark triad is “psychopathy”, but really that isn’t meant to encompass this clinical definition. For dark triad purposes it means turning down the empathy, not being tuned into the feelz of the girl you’re approaching, which makes you seem more DGAF and confident, which she might find more attractive, or if it’s not attractive, makes it easier for you to bounce without butthurt so you can keep on sarging.

  32. Along with Rollo’s three books, Stoicism, especially Seneca and Epictetus should be compulsory reading for all young men (and women too for that matter). Sadly, will never happen in the North American public school system. Kids will be systematically denied the skills to think and act to the fullest potential.

  33. Have heard the experience described as the psychopath cannot be brave or courageous, because there is no fear in the first place that must be overcome.

    This is mistaken…psychopaths don’t let their emotions inhibit them from doing what they want–psychopaths have emotions like anyone else.

  34. Women’s “superior emotional capacity” is actually a huge weakness. Fear is an emotion that leads to insecurity that cripples and weakens. This must explain why mitigating insecurity is a huge driver in female behavior.

  35. “There is a brain condition that makes people unable to feel emotions. Such people can’t make decisions. You can look it up.”

    Interesting article on the subject posted by JT McMahon.
    My thoughts are similar to his.
    It might also come down (seems to, just looking at the responses here) to exactly what a “decision” is considered to be.
    Getting out of bed in the morning is a decision. Brushing one’s teeth is a decision. From my point of view, if robots couldn’t make decisions we wouldn’t have self-driving vehicles or roombas. Yes, they are programmed in but so is much of our behavior. That doesn’t mean robots have free will, just that they make a decision.

  36. @Pinelero

    Women’s “superior emotional capacity” is actually a huge weakness. Fear is an emotion that leads to insecurity that cripples and weakens. This must explain why mitigating insecurity is a huge driver in female behavior.

    Otoh, women’s insecurity drives them to organize themselves as a herd and fight as a herd. It also causes them to look for strong male leadership. So, while the weakness may be individual, it is less of a problem for women than you might think at first glance.

    Vive la difference!

  37. Of course Girl Scouts plan no such name change…

    This is how things happen… In full daylight with barely a murmer.

    See you in the Alpha Farms.

  38. It took two previous columns plus eight more paragraphs to lay out all the pieces, but now we’re really deep into crucial material: can we usefully manage our emotions or do they manage us?

    (Not to mention the sometimes negative or confused emotions of others that we are constantly exposed to like some insidious form of background radiation).

    This cuts right to the heart of Rollo’s great work

    There’s a lot to think about on a personal level here before responding, but I will say off the bat that useless, self-defeating, short-circuiting emotion is what you get on a societal level when our media, business and politics become too feminized.

  39. from McMahon’s article:

    And then the other person dug in his heels and refused to budge. He wasn’t swayed by your logic. Were you flabbergasted?

    the article’s question is explained by ego investment in a position…because ego has a heavy emotional component, emotions are necessarily a part of the investment

    kind of like how science decisions are made, along with funding driving the direction and biases

    logic and reason play a role, but they are hardly the only components in decision making

    true for men as well as women

  40. Re BSA

    “Surbaugh said that having separate units for boys and girls should alleviate concerns that girls joining the BSA for the first time might be at a disadvantage in seeking leadership opportunities.“

    Different but equal. The Armed Forces have been promoting both sexes on different standards for years. Fitness tests being the most stark.

    “Girl Scout leaders said they were blindsided by the move…”

    Faux shock. They’ve been preaching the equalism and empowerment schtick for a long time. On one hand GSA claims shock of BSA poaching while during their meetings they preach feminism. What could go wrong? Oh a lot:

    Hope that was just a photo-op.

    It’s not dissimilar to good cop CAIR offering bespoke-suited justifications of indignancy while bad cop others execute destruction.

  41. For dark triad purposes it means turning down the empathy, not being tuned into the feelz of the girl you’re approaching, which makes you seem more DGAF and confident, which she might find more attractive, or if it’s not attractive, makes it easier for you to bounce without butthurt so you can keep on sarging.

    so, dark triad means that you can’t calibrate a girl’s emotional state?…doesn’t much sound like pickup to me…

    …perhaps a better explanation is that dark triad men can avoid making decisions based on their own emotions…the signals come through and are assigned a priority based on whether they help the triad achieve his mssion…so he can continue to calibrate a woman’s emotions and make decisions that help him achieve his mission…for example, fear of approaching may be assigned a near-zero priority, while comfort signals may be assigned a high priority…so that the triad can more easily approach women…

    …for autists, being behaviorally psychopathic–as opposed to anatomically/clinically–being able to not be dominated by emotions is a great help…autists typically have problems with anger and anxiety triggers…we also have problems with seeking inappropriate stimulation…being free to act without being dominated by these is a great help socially

  42. One thing that strikes me about emotion is how contagious it can be. People are always saying “think for yourself” but you also need the strength to feel for yourself — don’t be unduly swayed by other individuals or by the crowd.

    Rollo, I’m guessing there’s some feminine evo psych aspect to this contagion effect that might be up your alley to explore…

  43. OBIT

    ” short-circuiting emotion is what you get on a societal level when our media, business and politics become too feminized.”

    This is by design.

    Your masters understand what Amygdala Hijack means and does…

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amygdala_hijack

    It’s not random. Nor is the contagion effect lost on them…

  44. “so, dark triad means that you can’t calibrate a girl’s emotional state?…doesn’t much sound like pickup to me…”

    Psychopaths aren’t affected by emotional appeals…a woman’s go-to tactic.

    A woman can’t understand why this guy isn’t reacting as all other men do. That’s unnerving to her hindbrain.

    Ruthlessness = sexy

  45. @theASDgamer- women have decided to/or instinctively collectively herd together to mitigate their individual weakness. But this same herding together within the female social matrix is not without it’s own costs. Within the herd there is the “leveling” effect in that everyone is the same or should be the same or face the consequences. These consequences are banishment from the herd or public outings. Within the herd their is no real public discourse only tacit agreement at the surface with jealousy and hatred underneath the cute face of the groupthink. People willing to trade freedom for comfort are just slaves. The natural outcome of such a feminized group is just a horrible form totalitarian socialism.

  46. People willing to trade freedom for comfort are just slaves. The natural outcome of such a feminized group is just a horrible form totalitarian socialism.

    Which is why voting should be exclusively a male privilege.

    Don’t expect women to be men.

  47. anon – your comment about freewill vs programmed decisions, ….. here is a thoughtful take on that question, by Jordan Peterson – see approx 2:15 – 16:00.

    By way of JP’s conception of freewill, and let’s say, assuming he has got it more or less right, …. then I can’t see why AI won’t eventually emulate freewill, when on the fly self-program-modification is modeled correctly.

    JP’s discussion of chaos/order, with respect to the 2nd question he answers, approx 16:55 – 30:55, is pertinent to more precise definitions around freewill, as well..

    I haven’t listened to the rest of this JP talk yet, so I can’t comment about the rest.

  48. The discussion around psychopathy/autism, as the conditions relates to empathetic understanding/emotionality. I have heard it described more or less this way:

    That there are two systems of empathy. Understanding another’s perspective. And ‘feeling’ another’s feelz. Most people got both operating within norms. Psychos got the first system operating within norms, but the 2nd system much muted. Autists have the 2nd system operating within norms, but the 1st system is much muted.

    Not sure if this is right, but by by way of my recollection, some of the academics in the psychological field have discussed it in these terms. I have no links at the moment because this is just something I recollect hearing about (more than once).

    And as well …. I don’t think this means the psychos are free of emotionality. Just not empathetic emotionality. From my anecdotal experiences … seems to me that psychos (and BPDs) generally, got plenty of emotionality available for themselves.

  49. “then I can’t see why AI won’t eventually emulate freewill, when on the fly self-program-modification is modeled correctly”

    One important point here though. As I already pointed out in the last thread, life itself is contingent on self-referencing. A singular bacterium must maintain it’s membrane, in order to sustain it’s life, and as such, in some mysterious way, without the aid of a conventional nervous system (but instead probably by way of a ‘nervous system’ derived by way of algorithms governing morphogenic molecular interactions), must be able to differentiate subject/object. This power to do so is deeply mysterious. Can this be modeled computationally? Now we are really talking about hardware/software interface, in such a way that the software is deeply embedded and contingent upon the hardware itself. Can this be computationally modeled? Deep question.

  50. “Can this be computationally modeled? Deep question.”

    It’s the step-wise binarity of digital (which implies limits) vs. the smooth functions of analog (which implies infinity).

    Deeper perspective on a deep question. But yet this still doesn’t mean that self-referencing, in terms of ‘rewrite software as emerging for the hardware itself’, cannot be computationally modeled for a digital hardware substrate, necessarily …. just points to avenues for properly addressing the question. What do I mean by that? Maybe the power we seek in this respect is in the correct algorithms ….. with a particular precision around recursivity.

    And of course …. then there is also quantum computing to consider.

  51. “By way of JP’s conception of freewill, and let’s say, assuming he has got it more or less right, …. then I can’t see why AI won’t eventually emulate freewill, when on the fly self-program-modification is modeled correctly”

    I don’t see why AI won’t eventually emulate freewill by Libet’s conception of it either. Which is much more simplistic (though I think JP is the one who has it right).

    The problem with current AI is choice for novel situations (that’s the limiting factor for, say, designing an AI fighter aircraft that functions like a human operated one…they have such drones currently but humans fly them).

  52. “It’s the step-wise binarity of digital (which implies limits) vs. the smooth functions of analog (which implies infinity). ……. Deeper perspective on a deep question.”

    Now for a deeper perspective on a deeper perspective on a deep question:

    The implied infinite of analog function, is the time continuum. As such, can ‘correct algorithms ….. with a particular precision around recursivity’ be had that model the time continuum? By the flow of logic – that is the right question to ask – yet I don’t even know what that means exactly, because we don’t know what time is, exactly. Mmmmm? Time for some pondering methinks. I’m gonna have to think about this some. Anybody got some ideas around this?

  53. “If You Can’t Explain it to a Six Year Old, You Don’t Understand it Yourself”

    – Einstein

  54. Fred Flange, GBFC (Great Books For Cucks)
    May 1, 2018 at 12:24 pm

    “The true psychopath has a damaged or altered amygdala, . . . ”

    theasdgamer
    May 1, 2018 at 1:55 pm

    (The idea that psychopaths don’t feel fear) “. . . is mistaken…psychopaths don’t let their emotions inhibit them from doing what they want–psychopaths have emotions like anyone else.”
    ===============================================

    See, this is interesting – especially as this blogpost is specific to emotion.
    How to “square the circle” between these two – and does it give a clue as to the role of emotion in decision/action.

    Amygdala has to do with the experience of fear, necessary for learning where to not go, for instance (fear conditioning)

    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1025048802629

    Brain functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) confirms amygdalae do not activate normally in psychopaths. They don’t fire up when they normally would.

    “Wiring” may be an answer.
    In this circuitry dopamine is the gasoline.
    Dopamine originates from the ventral tegmental area (VTA); travels in a fuel line (mesolimbic dopamine pathway) to both the nucleus accumbens and the amygdalae.

    Nucleus accumbens when activated with a little dopamine (but not too much) is experienced as pleasure/exhilaration –

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165017399000235

    (Dated articles, you can google better)

    Per fMRI nucleus accumbens activates normally in the psychopath.

    So: some environmental stimulus causes VTA to juice a little dopamine;
    nucleus accumbens powers up but not the amygdalae.

    So the psychopath would experience something. A reasonable hypothesis is that the psychopath experiences what a “normal” would call exhilaration or pleasure.

    But we can’t actually know, if think about it.

    Difficulty is we are stuck within the brain we have.
    A normal can not know what the psychopath experiences.
    A psychopath can not know what the normal experiences.
    These are two different brains.
    It’s like a red-green colorblind person can learn to discern red-green, but not actually experience or know red-green.

    Kevin Dutton (PhD) tries to get around this dilemma in his book The Wisdom of Psychopaths (audio here)

    He performs a study with a special forces soldier, the latter a clinical psychopath. Describes comparison at 5:45.

    Later he repeats the experience as a “psychopath.”
    Using transcranial magnetic stimulation he temporarily de-activates his amygdalae. (An analogy is simulating blindness using a blindfold.)

    He describes the experience at 5:54.

    To discern the impact of emotion on behavior is actually very difficult; the more one thinks about it, the more it is realized how challenging is the task of even measuring the most basic elements of emotion with precision, and this means extrapolating anything from that imprecision is a courageous crapshoot.

  55. I read this a while back on a different blog:
    “Oxford’s Kevin Dutton explains some of our fascination (with psychopathic personalities):

    Psychopaths are assertive. Psychopaths don’t procrastinate. Psychopaths tend to focus on the positive. Psychopaths don’t take things personally; they don’t beat themselves up if things go wrong, even if they’re to blame. And they’re pretty cool under pressure. Those kinds of characteristics aren’t just important in the business arena, but also in everyday life.

    The key here is keeping it in context. Let’s think of psychopathic traits—ruthlessness, toughness, charm, focus—as the dials on a [recording] studio deck. If you were to turn all of those dials up to max, then you’re going to overload the circuit. You’re going to wind up getting 30 years inside or the electric chair or something like that. But if you have some of them up high and some of them down low, depending on the context, in certain endeavors, certain professions, you are going to be predisposed to great success. The key is to be able to turn them back down again.

    …I’ve interviewed a lot of special forces troops, especially the British Special Air Service. They’re like Navy SEALs. That’s a very good example of people who are pretty high on those psychopathic traits who are actually in a perfect occupation. Also, I interview in the book a top neurosurgeon—this was a surgeon who takes on operations that are especially risky—who said to me, “The most important thing when you’re conducting a dangerous operation, a risky operation, is you’ve got to be very cool under pressure, you’ve got to be focused. You can’t have too much empathy for the person that you’re operating on, because you wouldn’t be able to conduct that operation.” Surgeons do very nasty things to people when they’re on the operating table. If things do go wrong, the most important facet in a surgeon’s arsenal is decisiveness. You cannot freeze.”

    I think much of what people refer to as “psychopathic” isn’t psychopathic, but something more like compartmentalization. To take the last example, a healthcare provider can’t function as a healthcare provider is he/she “loses it” in when there’s blood all around. And if only psychopaths could be healthcare providers…well, a lot of us would probably be dead or never born.

  56. @asdgamer

    “so, dark triad means that you can’t calibrate a girl’s emotional state?…doesn’t much sound like pickup to me…”

    True I said part of turning down the empathy in PUA is “not being tuned into the feelz of the girl you’re approaching”. Of course as you point out, infield one should calibrate her emotional state like crazy. That’s different, you need to do that so you can suss out what buttons to push. I just meant (as advice to this year’s incoming freshmen) not trying to conform your approach to her feelz as an insincere pickup strategy, i.e., trying to pass as an “ally” to be attractive – always an epic fail.

    Otherwise I think we’re saying the same thing.

  57. @McMahon

    A normal can not know what the psychopath experiences.
    A psychopath can not know what the normal experiences.
    These are two different brains.

    To the extent that the differences are due to physiology, we might be able to attack this problem experimentally.

    Or magnetically, as I read a little further down, lol.

    So the psychopath would experience something. A reasonable hypothesis is that the psychopath experiences what a “normal” would call exhilaration or pleasure.

    So, risk-taking can be addictive for psychopaths. That’s been my operating hypothesis for a while.

    To discern the impact of emotion on behavior is actually very difficult; the more one thinks about it, the more it is realized how challenging is the task of even measuring the most basic elements of emotion with precision, and this means extrapolating anything from that imprecision is a courageous crapshoot.

    challenging, indeed…but scientists are capable of making a mountain of speculations using a thimbleful of facts

    @Wild Thing

    That there are two systems of empathy. Understanding another’s perspective. And ‘feeling’ another’s feelz. Most people got both operating within norms.

    Psychos got the first system operating within norms, but the 2nd system much muted.

    I think that psychos have both working normally, but just assign other people’s perspective and feelz a low priority in terms of whether it affects their mission-oriented behavior.

    Autists have the 2nd system operating within norms

    If you can’t perceive the social signals from other people, I don’t see how you can feel their feelz. Autists typically feel very isolated. As teenagers, even more than neurotypicals.

  58. A medical degree is a license to shed blood, poison people, cut people, saw off body parts, saw holes in people’s skulls, take organ specimens, stick fingers into people’s holes and make them uncomfortable, palpate boobz, see girls nekkid, and generally do stuff that’s considered misbehavior if you lack a medical degree…makes me wish I’d thought harder about medicine

  59. JT – your comment: – “But we can’t actually know, if think about it. ….Difficulty is we are stuck within the brain we have.A normal can not know what the psychopath experiences. A psychopath can not know what the normal experiences. These are two different brains.”

    Maybe not. If you agree that psychopathy is a peculiar kind of development within a development process that each and every person must go through, early on in development, in keeping with what I said as per comment on the thread for the previous article (April 30th @ 4:23 p.m):

    “Oh yes – so accurate. And a modicum of narcissism is inevitable and also healthy. Rugby – I truly believe that states of being such as BPD, and psychopathy, are like that too – a state of being that was dependent on a developmental process …… a process that we are all subject to but that was marked by a peculiar development in these cases. One needs to understand the design features of the human natures we all inhabit. That is the salve that saves oneself from the very real possible eventuality of Cluster B pathology. Fellowship with other people, by way of recognizing the common design features we are all subject to – that is the key. Other people help show us who we are. A treasure beyond words.:

    ….. then it follows that this condition of psychopathy may well be accessible. I think it is accessible. I experienced something very strange for a period of 3 months when I was 12 years old ….. I was overcome by a perspective of deep depersonalization, that was akin to being in a world populated by dream phantoms, as if my whole life of 12 years was actually a dream in which I did not have omnipotent powers (it wasn’t really ‘as if’, ….. the experience of it was like being slapped in the face with this realization – it was more like -‘it is’), yet I couldn’t grok the limits of my own powers, nor the nature of the dream phantoms all around me, within this new paradigm that was being forced upon me. This was profoundly disturbing ….. produced an extreme amount of anxiety with respect to having to consider that perhaps (‘probably’, it seemed like) I was truly all alone ….. akin to being in hell on earth – a very paranoia-inducing state, whereby the only solution left to oneself was to study the phantoms all around you as intently as possible to try to figure out what made them tick …. in my estimation in retrospect, the first glimmerings of psychopathy were overcoming me ….. a new gestalt whereby understanding other’s perspectives was not now working in tandem with the feeling of other’s feelz, Because these phantoms were now foreign agents … alien to me actually …. now the thing is, this all occurred to me regressively, …. I was just fine before that, and felt normal fellowship with everybody else……. and I count the day after about 3 months that I came out of it, thankfully, as a true blessing. The day it felt like I rejoined the human race again.

    I think psychopathy is actually like that …. however normally occurs in much earlier development, so not transparent to the individual, …. and what happened to me perhaps, is that I got a glimmering of what it is like vis-a-vis the usual perspective (i.e. -I had something to compare it to).

    I have gotten to know some psychos and BPD’s very well in my later life (but that is behind me now) and to me … they seem wounded like this. That is my opinion.

    Study of depersonalization disorders in adults, I think, could shed better light as to the nature of psychopathy (as long as it is understood by the studiers that these are two different disorders in some ways, by way of the differing process development timelines, but share similarities nevertheless).

  60. anon- Kevin Dutton is an idiot on his definitions of psychopathy, imo. He gets it all so wrong. Because he looks at the so-called positives and ignores the negatives, and a such, mistakes the nature of the so-called ‘positives’, and as such ends up with an extremely shallow perspective on the topic. I think he has daddy issues actually (as per his bio), and perhaps is using his so-called research to try to resolve these daddy issues. Too much garbage like this in the field of psychology. People routinely get into the field for the wrong reasons.

  61. theasdgamer
    May 2, 2018 at 8:43 am

    “So, risk-taking can be addictive for psychopaths.”
    ======================================
    Exactly.

    “challenging, indeed…but scientists are capable of making a mountain of speculations using a thimbleful of facts”
    ======================================
    Lol! Exactly.

    This blog precisely demonstrates one difference between male/female brain.

    Here we are, men, using experience and observation to take things apart.
    To engage in the endeavor of getting beneath the surface of what is merely seen and observed, to discern the very gears, to explain the mechanics of the universe: to figure out. To bring reason and prediction to chaos.

    Women do not do this.

    There is comparison of feelings, there is sometimes a conclusion, and opinion, based upon a unified feeling.

    But never for woman is there this digging into the abyss, this sounding of depths, this dogged persistent effort to determine why it is so.

    On this thread, right now, we demonstrate a key distinction..

  62. Risk taking is (potentially) addictive for anyone, isn’t it?
    It causes a dopamine rush (and raises T levels).

  63. JT Mc
    Your point is crucial and in general I agree. And yet I’ve interviewed numerous women — researchers in medical fields and biomedical engineering — who are highly accomplished, focused and curious, eager to dig into the abyss in their area of expertise.

    Could the difference be that they somehow buck the odds to remain individuals rather than getting plugged in, dumbed down and swept away by the larger feminine matrix?

  64. … I should add that these are very often NOT American women, or women originally from here in America

  65. Risk taking is (potentially) addictive for anyone, isn’t it?
    It causes a dopamine rush (and raises T levels).

    Shouldn’t gamble…just because a mustache looks good on your mom doesn’t mean you can wear it well

  66. I always though of it as Instinct, and then everything else, even though I logically knew emotion and reason are separate, I always put them on the same level of mental processing.
    Like this…
    Stimulus -> Instinct processing-> Emotional or Reason processing (based on sex)
    instead of…
    Stimulus -> Instinct processing-> Emotional processing -> Reason processing

    This clears up the problem I always had with the outliers. Emotional men, and logical woman.
    There are enough of both that the probably can’t really be called outliers.
    Everyone has can use all 3 processes, but don’t have to.
    We already know a lot of times people stop at instinct, but there’s no reason a man can’t become accustomed to stopping at emotion eve though he’s predisposed to continuing on to logic.
    Because of the way that woman’s brains are wired, they’re predisposed to stop at emotion, but that doesn’t mean they can’t become accustomed to moving on to reason.

  67. @Eh

    This strange lookin kid come to my door selling Transcout cookies.

    I told it you better be carefull,you could wind up with your picture on a carton of half and half.

  68. Many times when reacting to a situation my mother and sister often comment that i do not have emotions at all and I am like, but i don’t you see the logic behind the situation, and they are like yeah we see it but are unable to accept the facts and find it difficult to understand me. Fortunately they do not have any problem with me being like that, rather they value it because in many situations they ask me to decide when matters important for the family so that they may not be making a mistake.

  69. anon
    May 2, 2018 at 9:20 am

    “Risk taking is (potentially) addictive for anyone, isn’t it?
    It causes a dopamine rush (and raises T levels).”
    =========================================
    Can be.

    There’s an idea in psychiatry that chronically low dopamine-state brains are risk-taking brains, in an effort to push dopamine and feel anything at all – otherwise the life-experience is one of unrelieved dullness. Conversely, the high-dopamine/low-serotonin brains would avoid risk; their lives have far too much sharpness for comfort as is on any given day.

    Risk-taking:

    ———-

    O.B.I.T.
    May 2, 2018 at 9:30 am

    “. . . And yet I’ve interviewed numerous women — researchers in medical fields and biomedical engineering — who are highly accomplished, focused and curious, eager to dig into the abyss in their area of expertise.”
    ==========================================
    Concur, have known a few.

    Thinking, the degree of anything can be measured in individuals and plotted on a Gaussian curve for the population. There would be substantial overlap between two compared populations – say, men and women.

    So here, some men are shorter than some women, individually.
    So it could also be with classically feminine patterns of thought and inquiry, some men have a lot of it; and some women have a lot of classically male characteristics.
    Some women can be more men than a man. And vice-versa.
    Even so, the statistical mean or average for the population differs.

    Another interesting question is: due to the wiring patterns as noted in Rollo’s diagram above, yes, a woman can master the motorcycle: but must she apply substantially more effort towards that objective? Is it more difficult for her due to her inherent wiring, than say, the typical man, to achieve parity of performance?

    One interesting aside is – whatever the parameter – women tend to cluster more tightly about their mean. There is less variability in women. Rollo probably has interesting theories as to why, from the evo-bio-psycho perspective, this may be so.

  70. So yah, this is a little lengthy and it is engineered to pull emotions (a key component of personal connection essential to the female brain).

    But towards the end is a woman wingsuiter:

    Aptly demonstrates that there is overlap, and outliers, in any parameter.

  71. Right, so did the outlier benefit from different brain wiring, or different socialization (avoiding the leveling process of female groupthink), or a combination of both — or something else?

  72. Psychopaths benefit by agreeing with their instinct, not outthinking what comes naturally.

  73. O.B.I.T.
    May 2, 2018 at 10:47 am

    “Right, so did the outlier benefit from different brain wiring, or different socialization (avoiding the leveling process of female groupthink), or a combination of both — or something else?”
    =============================================================

    Severus Snape’s “no idea”

    Genetically identical twins are not actually, turns out, identical.
    Environment influences development; and vice-versa. Experience of abuse will switch”on” some genes that otherwise remain silent, or turn off others that would have been on.

    Same tree will look very different exposed to the winds of a mountaintop than nestled in a forest. Potentiality identical; yet very different per environment.

    Some trees would not survive on the mountaintop at all due to inherent genetic limits.

    Easier to learn motorcycle before age 26 than after; foreign language before age 7 than after. But someone could develop neither.

    But that inquiry itself – this what-causes-what, this is-it-this-or-is-it-that, the impulse to even first ask the question and drive to then pin down a definitive answer — that inquiry itself, this method —- is very male.

Speak your mind

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.