How can SOME women be attracted by this ?

[SASALELE]

When a man says “i love latinas” or “i love brunettes” or “i love blonde hair and blue eyes”

Thats like saying “im attracted to everyone with your general traits”

How is that romantic

But often when I see men who say stuff like this, I see women seeking attention, posting themselves like an audition, and claiming theyre part of whatever his preferences are.

I even see relationships start from this.
@subfive4life @Ghoultune

 

[BigDihDiddy]

Type shit that’s what I been saying when girl says she likes n***a with big dih

 

[theRetard]

it's just aesthetical preference

 

[SASALELE]

it's just aesthetical preference

defining the quotes doesnt explain why its attractive

 

[theRetard]

defining the quotes doesnt explain why its attractive

it's attractive because they like it

 

[SASALELE]

it's attractive because they like it

circular reasoning

 

[theRetard]

circular reasoning

impossible to avoid circular reasoning when it comes to things you can't get access. you can't get access to their consciousness

 

[SASALELE]

impossible to avoid circular reasoning when it comes to things you can't get access. you can't get access to their consciousness

You dont need access to people consciousness. You dont find out why people like things by asking them.

In studies where people try to find out why the participants think a certain way, neuroscience, experiments, etc are used. Asking the participants in not reliable enough is most cases.

 

[tjlfmz]

blonde hair and blue eyes worst traits if they dont have green or brown eyes and brunette hair its cooked

 

[theRetard]

You dont need access to people consciousness. You dont find out why people like things by asking them.

In studies where people try to find out why the participants think a certain way, neuroscience, experiments, etc are used. Asking the participants in not reliable enough is most cases.

asking them is much better way but you can't be sure if they aren't lying. neuroscience and experiments and other empirical things dont' explain anything when it comes to consciousness and other spiritual things, they can only explain hormones, neurons etc but not inner feeling or thoughts

 

[</3]

When a man says “i love latinas” or “i love brunettes” or “i love blonde hair and blue eyes”

Thats like saying “im attracted to everyone with your general traits”

How is that romantic

But often when I see men who say stuff like this, I see women seeking attention, posting themselves like an audition, and claiming theyre part of whatever his preferences are.

I even see relationships start from this.
@subfive4life @Ghoultune

yeye i don’t rly think it’s that romantic but it’s also not like the end of the world, at the end of a day it’s a preference
my relationship didn’t start like that tbh so i cant rly say much for that

 

[SASALELE]

soul things

asking them is much better way but you can't be sure if they aren't lying.

im afraid its much bigger than “they might be lying”. An extreme amount of biases can occur in questionnaires, surveys, and conversations. They are only fit for gathering opinions and experiences, not for explaining the cause of those opinions and experiences. Questions framing can very easily occur where changing the words slightly can completely change the results. Peoples moods, environments, and timing can influence their answer. I could name more.

neuroscience and experiments and other empirical things dont' explain anything when it comes to consciousness and other soul things, they can only explain hormones, neurons etc but not inner feeling or thoughts

Neuroscience alone, or experiments alone are not reliable for understanding why people do, feel, or think certain ways. These were just two examples i gave you. To understand people in that way, you would need a combination pf many study methods. But neuroscience and experiments produce far less biases than questioning does. If I was conducting a study on the placebo effect for example, i most likely would not even include questioning. I would include neuroscience, clinical trials, and evolutionary reasoning. That is the difference between science and interviews.

 

[theRetard]

Neuroscience alone, or experiments alone are not reliable for understanding why people do, feel, or think certain ways. These were just two examples i gave you. To understand people in that way, you would need a combination pf many study methods. But neuroscience and experiments produce far less biases than questioning does. If I was conducting a study on the placebo effect for example, i most likely would not even include questioning. I would include neuroscience, clinical trials, and evolutionary reasoning. That is the difference between science and interviews.

science here is irrelevant. you need metaphysics/axiology to understand why do they like it.
like i said it's just aesthetical preference but you don't like this explanation

 

[TonyDr]

When a man says “i love latinas” or “i love brunettes” or “i love blonde hair and blue eyes”

I do in fact, love my brunette fiancée

 

[SASALELE]

you need metaphysics/axiology

metaphysics is irrelevant. Science explain what influences someone to think, feel, or act a certain way. Metaphysics is for defining and interpreting. Metaphysics is the underlying framework/rules for how things work, whilst studies and science show how things actually happen within that framework/rules.

They are dependant on each other, but without science, metaphysics are abstract and can only speculate.

axiology is also conceptual and normative. You can not reliably use it alone to prove why someone thinks, feels, and acts.

Axiology is like building a building according to principles of beauty, how it “should” function, and how to make it stable, whilst science is observing how the building actually performs over time. Maybe natural factors or material degrades it, or people miss use it.

 

[theRetard]

metaphysics is irrelevant. Science explain what influences someone to think, feel, or act a certain way. Metaphysics is for defining and interpreting. Metaphysics is the underlying framework/rules for how things work, whilst studies and science show how things actually happen within that framework/rules.

They are dependant on each other, but without science, metaphysics are abstract and can only speculate.

axiology is also conceptual and normative. You can not reliably use it alone to prove why someone thinks, feels, and acts.

Axiology is like building a building according to principles of beauty, how it “should” function, and how to make it stable, whilst science is observing how the building actually performs over time. Maybe natural factors or material degrades it, or people miss use it.

 

[theRetard]

metaphysics is irrelevant. Science explain what influences someone to think, feel, or act a certain way. Metaphysics is for defining and interpreting. Metaphysics is the underlying framework/rules for how things work, whilst studies and science show how things actually happen within that framework/rules.

They are dependant on each other, but without science, metaphysics are abstract and can only speculate.

axiology is also conceptual and normative. You can not reliably use it alone to prove why someone thinks, feels, and acts.

Axiology is like building a building according to principles of beauty, how it “should” function, and how to make it stable, whilst science is observing how the building actually performs over time. Maybe natural factors or material degrades it, or people miss use it.

metaphysics is superior to science since it's more theoretic and abstract. abstract things explain much more and much more accurate. the truth and beauty are abstract too, science can't explain them at all

 

[SASALELE]

i said it's just aesthetical preference but you don't like this explanation

because it doesnt explain anything. Saying that people have preferences doesnt explain why the other sex attract to the specific way of hitting on them. To explain this you would need extensive research. Its autistic to think im actually asking you to prove it to me. Its more appropriate to give a theory, hypothesis, or simply say “i dont know” than to say “umm they like it because people have preferences”. Doesnt make sense.

 

[theRetard]

why the other sex attract to the specific way of hitting on them.

then it's just biological+environmental if you are asking about sexual attraction rather than aesthetical one (different things)

 

[SASALELE]

View attachment 252090

This doesnt consist of any progress in this conversation neither does it prove any of your arguments. Like I said, metaphysics is a framework, of course you cant think without it.

Metaphysics are the rules for how we should define things. Science uses those rules to define. Without metaphysics, we couldnt do science. Without science the question of why will remain speculative, which is the point.

 

[theRetard]

This doesnt consist of any progress in this conversation neither does it prove any of your arguments. Like I said, metaphysics is a framework, of course you cant think without it.

Metaphysics are the rules for how we should define things. Science uses those rules to define. Without metaphysics, we couldnt do science. Without science the question of why will remain speculative, which is the point.

speculations are important

 

[SASALELE]

metaphysics is superior to science since it's more theoretic and abstract. abstract things explain much more and much more accurate. the truth and beauty are abstract too, science can't explain them at all

The literal definition of “theoretic” and “abstract” is that it does NOT explain anything.

Of course science cant explain everything. Humans in general cant obtain all information there is. But it explains way more things than theorising, including why people accept “i like people who look like you” as something to award with attention.

 

[theRetard]

The literal definition of “theoretic” and “abstract” is that it does NOT explain anything.

Of course science cant explain everything. Humans in general cant obtain all information there is. But it explains way more things than theorising, including why people accept “i like people who look like you” as something to award with attention.

metaphysics gives deeper and fundamental knowledge on reality. reality as such is metaphysical/ontological

 

[SASALELE]

speculations are important

yes, experiments always include theories. You need a speculation before you can begin to prove that speculation. They are completely dependent on each other.

 

[SASALELE]

metaphysics gives deeper and fundamental knowledge on reality. reality as such is metaphysical/ontological

Metaphysics can only give conceptual clarity, not explain real world behaviour. It doesnt matter how profound and deep your metaphysical reasoning is, it can only clarify concepts and suggest possibilities. Its like saying what “could” be true vs backing that same “could” up with proof.

 

[theRetard]

Metaphysics can only give conceptual clarity, not explain real world behaviour. It doesnt matter how profound and deep your metaphysical reasoning is, it can only clarify concepts and suggest possibilities. Its like saying what “could” be true vs backing that same “could” up with proof.

real world behaviour is a metaphysical thing in the first place (such things as reality and world are metaphysical). if metaphysics can only give you possibility, then can you prove the existence of truth? or existence of possibility, or existence of existence?

 

[SASALELE]

real world behaviour is a metaphysical thing in the first place (such things as reality and world are metaphysical)

When you say “you need metaphysics to prove it” you are right. You need metaphysics for everything related. But when you say “you need metaphysics instead of science”, it is a logical fallacy.
Metaphysics = rules for how science and thinking in general could be conducted.
Science = deeper and precise understanding of why things happen in practice.

Analogy:
Metaphysics defines the rules of chess. What is a “move” or what is a “piece”
Science is watching a player make a move. Why did the player make this particular move?

if metaphysics can only give you possibility, then can you prove the existence of truth? or existence of possibility, or existence of existence?

What science cant prove, metaphysics cant either. What metaphysics cant prove, science sometimes can.

 

[theRetard]

When you say “you need metaphysics to prove it” you are right. You need metaphysics for everything related. But when you say “you need metaphysics instead of science”, it is a logical fallacy.
Metaphysics = rules for how science and thinking in general could be conducted.
Science = deeper and precise understanding of why things happen in practice.

Analogy:
Metaphysics defines the rules of chess. What is a “move” or what is a “piece”
Science is watching a player make a move. Why did the player make this particular move?


What science cant prove, metaphysics cant either. What metaphysics cant prove, science sometimes can.

logical fallacies do not exist, at least not in a way you think it does
but science is more practical and concrete, yeah

>What science cant prove, metaphysics cant either. What metaphysics cant prove, science sometimes can.

what science can't prove, metaphysics can (science except maths only works with material reality, not ideal/spiritual)

 

[Scul1]

it's just aesthetical preference

Sodomitecel

 

[theRetard]

Sodomitecel

why do you insult me

 

[Scul1]

why do you insult me
View attachment 252110

Jk

 

[theRetard]

Jk

you made me cry with these "jokes"

 

[Scul1]

you made me cry with these "jokes"

I was jk also rep me

 

[ShitUsername]

No tag no care

 

[ShitUsername]

you made me cry with these "jokes"

Can i fuck u

 

[theRetard]

Can i fuck u

not that i'm a whore but...
i'm ready

 

[ShitUsername]

not that i'm a whore but...
i'm ready

@Scul1

 

[Scul1]

@Scul1

Son

 

[ShitUsername]

Son

I got rizz

 

[theRetard]

I got rizz

how dare you seduce me?!
i'm built for my Yuki

 

[ShitUsername]

how dare you seduce me?!
i'm built for my Yuki
View attachment 252113

Ur built for my big cock

 

[theRetard]

Ur built for my big cock

you are not yuki...

 

[ShitUsername]

you are not yuki...
View attachment 252115

Im better

 

[SASALELE]

what science can't prove, metaphysics can (science except maths only works with material reality, not ideal/spiritual)

First of all, attraction to a specific “compliment” is primarily material. Its rooted in biology, chemistry and perception. That people sometimes interpret attraction spiritually is conceptual, not fact. The experience might feel spiritual, but the mechanism is physical.

Second of all, metaphysics doesnt prove anything. Thats why in religion, we have faith. You cannot prove Gods existence, but you can argument as to why it is logically consistent, and explore necessary conditions.

Metaphysics only explains what things are coherent and necessary in theory.

 

[theRetard]

Im better

me touching my dick while thinking about my yuki...
you don't make me hard like yuki does

 

[ShitUsername]

me touching my dick while thinking about my yuki...
you don't make me hard like yuki does
View attachment 252117

Ill show u my dick

 

[SASALELE]

me touching my dick while thinking about my yuki...
you don't make me hard like yuki does
View attachment 252117

what is this side quest conversation youre having

 

[limo8]

When a man says “i love latinas” or “i love brunettes” or “i love blonde hair and blue eyes”

Thats like saying “im attracted to everyone with your general traits”

How is that romantic

But often when I see men who say stuff like this, I see women seeking attention, posting themselves like an audition, and claiming theyre part of whatever his preferences are.

I even see relationships start from this.
@subfive4life @Ghoultune

'i feel like reading feminist books' ahh post

 

[theRetard]

First of all, attraction to a specific “compliment” is primarily material. Its rooted in biology, chemistry and perception. That people sometimes interpret attraction spiritually is conceptual, not fact. The experience might feel spiritual, but the mechanism is physical.

Second of all, metaphysics doesnt prove anything. Thats why in religion, we have faith. You cannot prove Gods existence, but you can argument as to why it is logically consistent, and explore necessary conditions.

Metaphysics only explains what things are coherent and necessary in theory.

chemistry and biology can explain material aspect of attraction but not formal cause, neither teleological or efficient. (everything has 4 causes, science explains only material cause).
on god, you can prove his existence through reasoning. ofc empirically you can't do this but empiricism is wrong and rationalism is superior to it.
metaphysics is only theory yeah but theory is important

 

[theRetard]

what is this side quest conversation youre having

this guy is trying to distract me from my yuki