I had this conversation in chat and it basically teaches philosophy to whoever reads it. For those with not enough time to study philosophy elaborately, this conversation will be a good update.

Anicca: whats on your mind?
Mr._Marville: how did your walk of life bring you to PUA chat
Anicca: a desire to learn what makes woman attracted to somebody, and a now unknown person on the internet that linked me to this community
Mr._Marville: ah, I see, so, you are a woman called Anicca, or is Anicca the name of the woman you pursue?
Anicca: Anicca comes from buddhism, its Pali for 'impermanence'
Mr._Marville: so it is a nickname?
Mr._Marville: Then, tell us, what mesmerizing insights have Buddhism and PUA thus far taught you about the fleetingness of the female psyche?
Anicca: its my username for a lot of my forum memberships in the community
Anicca: it taught me that everything passes and you shouldn't cling onto anything
Anicca: that includes women's attraction to you
Anicca: good question
Mr._Marville: If everything passes, then, what is the goal of everything?
Mr._Marville: And, reversely - your attraction to a woman.
Anicca: I guess by us clinging onto something and then having it taken away allows us to learn through experience that everything is impermanent
Anicca: but that may not be the only lesson in life we have to learn
Mr._Marville: But why are you still dealing with us, this matter has been settled and dealt with in Plato's Politeia, The Ideal Republic, where the theme of fleetingness and societies hankering after translucent desires is covered in detail . . .
Anicca: I havent read that, is it also known as Platos Republic?
Mr._Marville: yes
Anicca: thats cool I noticed a copy of that on my mates bookshelf and thought how I wanted to read it
Mr._Marville: In the dialogues it is essentially argued that matter is inherently prone to decay, and so everything shifts and changes, even societies change through revolutions. However by contemplating ideas, the concepts behind things, which exist outside of material reality in a realm of ideas, our minds can escape this "prison-cave" of sensation.
Anicca: ahh yaeh I'm with you
Anicca: Stephen Covey talks about that in his 7 Habits book
Mr._Marville: Basically, seeking Truth and knowing Truth lifts us above ourselves and makes us more resistant to all the temptations of mass consumerism. We live in a society ruled by distractions, and for Plato a society must decay unless it ruled by philosophers.
Mr._Marville: People always talk about "the wisdom of the East," but really, Plato's writing has more wisdom in it than Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism piled together in a heap.
Anicca: Yeah, I guess you're right
Mr._Marville: You can also connect Plato to PUA. For instance he argues that the women's materialism makes their men forget about honour and pursue only riches to please them.
Mr._Marville: But then again it's impossible to say "Plato really argued this or that"
Mr._Marville: his books are filled with dialogues and we don't know who Plato really sides with as he writes
Mr._Marville: he probably just sided with the objective pursuit of Truth
Anicca: I guess thats an awesome rhetorical technique
Anicca: where it encourages the reader to think for themselves
Mr._Marville: yes
Anicca: and judge which is the right side
Mr._Marville: so I encourage everyone to read it
Mr._Marville: indeed
Anicca: I think I will actually
Anicca: although my to read list is volumes
Mr._Marville: okay good, of all the books I read in my life, which is hundreds, Plato's Republic is definitely top tier
Mr._Marville: And don't give up while reading because it gets to the peak at the end
Mr._Marville: where he describes the rise and fall of political regimes
Anicca: ok, yeah thats gonna get read
Anicca: I was actually coming in here today to ask some advice on how to begin learning the PUA from scratch. I was heavily involved years ago but I want to learn it all over again in a structured way
Mr._Marville: I was 16 years when I read it
Anicca: whether it be paying for an online school membership, a bootcamp, or just my own plan
Mr._Marville: and I thought OMG you can understand and explain everything with this! The French Revolution, Rise of Hitler, existence of Hippy movement, power of Russian Oligarchs, etc
Mr._Marville: and Plato wrote that 2400 years ago lets not forget
Anicca: its like a macrocosm of the idea I was talking about
Mr._Marville: Okay
Mr._Marville: well
Anicca: everything is impermanent
Mr._Marville: I recommend with starting to read Plato's Republic
Anicca: Plato's republic as a way of learning game???
Mr._Marville: As a way of increasing your thinking, speaking, inner stability
Mr._Marville: if you have read this book, you know the Truth of human nature and the nature of society
Mr._Marville: and you can stand up better against all this whimsical crap fashion culture and peer pressure throws at you
Mr._Marville: and thus become a more stable person and possibly more attractive as such.
Anicca: so its inner game material then
Anicca: ok
Mr._Marville: Oh definitely
Mr._Marville: It's the best inner game material ever.
Mr._Marville: It teaches you that all the values of mainstream society are only for commerce, fickle fame and pleasure pursuit, and utterly insignififcant in the long run.
Anicca: Did you know the theory of evolution is said to have originated with the greek philosophers
Anicca: it may have pre-dated that but thats the earliest record for it
Mr._Marville: yes in fact Aristotle is the first to formulate the theory of evolution
Mr._Marville: however he cannot accept it because the cosmic order expresses too much balance and harmony to allow a natural selection based upon randomness
Mr._Marville: but he does formulate it, but then rejects it.
Mr._Marville: google Aristotle and twin-headed sheep and you might find it
Anicca: well I know spiritual people who believe in a divine order alongside evolution
Mr._Marville: Spinozism
Anicca: ah ok
Mr._Marville: but then again even Augustine accepts evolution
Mr._Marville: he says God planted the seeds but that the work itself is still developing
Mr._Marville: hence the Catholic Church is more open to evolutionism than Protestantism
Mr._Marville: because Protestants believe in the literal expression of Gods word through the bible
Anicca: I havent read any of the classic philosophers really, Marx and possibly a few others, but I was an English academic
Mr._Marville: and Catholicism accepts more allegoric explanations.
Mr._Marville: Marx is just basically Aristotle upside down
Anicca: ok
Mr._Marville: Aristotle argues how we do the mundane labour things, such as planting seed, cooking, building house, etc, to ultimately allow the great pursuits of life, such as thinking about justice, values and virtues through philosophy
Mr._Marville: Marx then says the economy, meaning the labour classes, are the true engine of history, and that all this talking about virtues and justice is a translucent side effect of the economic state of society.
Anicca: ah I see
Anicca: and both of those theories, per sae, are quite reasonable
Mr._Marville: Even his core thought Marx derrived from Aristotle. Aristotle pointed out how a sandal has value in more than one sense: in the sense of the labour it took to make it, but also in the sense of trading it away or selling it. Marx then said that society had become "estranged" of itself, because if was fascinated by making profits with its products; the point of the labour was no longer the product being made, but only the trade value, meaning the profit. Hence Marx' begins with the sandal example and quotes Aristotle, then points out how capitalist economy was trapped by a "Fetjish" with profit, and "estranged" the workman from what he was doing with his labour.

Anicca: I see
Mr._Marville: Yes, both are reasonable, however I will say that our ideas of virtue, of justice, ultimately allows us to rise above ourselves.
Anicca: yes, in fact capitalism is where I habitually pin the blame for most of todays troubles
Anicca: its got out of control
Anicca: we need to transend it
Anicca: but I suppose the real thing to pin the blame on is the human being himself
Mr._Marville: For instance the biblical culture thought of time as a scarce thing, as something that would run out with the end of days. Its culture understood time as a linear concept. This then, argued by Max Weber and others, led to a culture of entrepreneurship, investing, a more dynamic concept of making value of your time. Other cultures considered time to be cyclical, repetitive, infinite, and therefore more aimed at satisfying the desires of the moment. In many African countries, they pay people per day. Because if they paid them per week, they would not show up the next day. So our personal effectiveness is really tied to our culture and not just to the needs of our belly.
Anicca: yeah, living for the future or the past
Mr._Marville: Which comes back to what we talk about - transcending immediate needs, moving beyond the whims of instant gratification, focusing on building up something for the long run.
Anicca: oh yeah
Anicca: I have my eckhart tolle book thats also on my to read list
Anicca: read it years ago but not recently
Mr._Marville: Which, if you break it down to PUA: Men seek to build monuments. Women look for providers. You see that most great inventors, philosophers, revolutionaries - people who really wanted to climb the mountain in the horizon and tried to get us to tug all into the same direction - the far majority of them were men.
Anicca: yes, that relates to pick up as well
Anicca: men want to achieve a certain number of lays
Anicca: achieve lays from women from all different countries and races
Mr._Marville: However we have a culture which is totally in the grip of fashion. Celebrity magazines, vapid TV-shows, wearing fancy dresses. Most of it is aimed at short-term consumption. To keep the cash rolling and the economy spinning. But the great thought which made it all possible, our culture thinks derrisively of that. It's considered "History of Great While Males - how Paternalistic, what a Patriarchy!" And if you see these guys in high school reading books in the library, you have these girls coming to them saying: "Ah what a good boy, doing your homework," and they think of them as nerdy, dusty, boring geeks who will never have a girlfriend.
Mr._Marville: Our society doesn't want to create masculine men anymore, it doesn't want to create men who transcend the temporal and set their minds upon achieving greater things. Which comes back to Plato: Western society has reached the peak of its wealth, and is now sinking away in the momentum of decadence it has created
Mr._Marville: just look at PUA
Mr._Marville: what does it do?
Mr._Marville: It teaches men to fare through the minefields of modern dating, it teaches them to jump through the emotional hoops laid out by women.
Anicca: at its best, it empowers men
Anicca: maybe
Mr._Marville: And also we have the welfare state, it takes away the punishment for choosing an unreliable partner to make children with.
Mr._Marville: And it provides for people who do not think for themselves effectively, as does our technology.
Anicca: yes, but it has the potential to empower these AFCs, and in many ways it does
Mr._Marville: With other words, it eliminates selective mechanisms, and it rewards "Justin Bieber Pretty Boys" and "50 Cent Brainless Brawn".
Mr._Marville: And it makes them dependent on the whims of the woman, which distracts them from really using their minds on long-term objectives.
Anicca: it may be doing that now in many cases, but it has the potential to be a huge catalyst for growth
Mr._Marville: Well, regardless of which sex has a higher drive for sex, which is admittedly a bit fishy to prove, we all know that women, in this society, have power over men by withholding sex from them. It is because sex-harassment by males has such a great stigma attached to it, that even the implication of it can ruin ones career and standing.
Mr._Marville: PUA teaches men to use the same sort of passive aggressive, emotional blackmail that women use.
Mr._Marville: For instance yesterday I was reading a thread about a guy who makes up stories about his cat passing away, and then attacking a woman verbally for being "insensitive" when she doesn't show enough compassion
Anicca: they're learning, they arn't the finished product
Mr._Marville: Most of PUA is about seeking outside validation.
Mr._Marville: So people copy these memes to be popular, such as "I give money to homeless kids in Africa," or "I totally support emancipation, after all, our system is so unfair to women." PUA encourages you to use these memes, because criticizing them is considered insensitive, therefore nobody will counterspeak you, therefore you will temporarily become group leader. And women seek to hook up with the group leader.
Mr._Marville: As I said, by teaching men to jump through the emotional hoops of women, PUA, in many regards, teaches men to become like women. Like complimenting women for things men aren't supposed to care about; affirming their value for things that are symptoms of a fickle culture.
Mr._Marville: and behaving like a weirdo like mystery for no other reason than to catch their attention

Didn't read the whole chat transcript. Just browsed through some of the content.

The title is one of the worst seduction advice I've seen around here. You're basically sarging yourself out of the f-close for most women. I have huge doubts if the OP is EVER getting laid. Very few girls want to talk about Philosophy-- they want to talk about themselves.

And generally speaking, girls who are into Philosophy are the masculine, ugly types although there are exceptions.

_________________
Approach. Open. Escalate. Isolate

Here are my two essential rules on texting that will save you tons of time and money:

general-questions/topic137931.html

If you haven't read all of it, you cannot judge it properly. This thread is not so much about getting laid as it about inner development. Your reply is so full of resentment towards people who actually read, study and possess knowledge. Also I slept with a great number of beautiful women as a result of my ability to carry a conversation philosophically.

I posted a reply to an individual poster's thread; not a set of individuals.

At any rate, after reading a few sentences, I found your arguments too shallow and pretentious so I didn't read the rest.

It's like picking up a book. If the first paragraph catches your attention and the following paragraphs have sustained your interest, you just can't help but finish everything in one sitting.

Selective learning is effective for a reason. Just read the epic Body Language thread and you'll know why it's getting more than a hundred thousand reads.

_________________
Approach. Open. Escalate. Isolate

Here are my two essential rules on texting that will save you tons of time and money:

general-questions/topic137931.html

First of all I want to make clear that no matter how heated up arguments can be, and regardless of how quickly one can jump to conclusions, all discourse would be pointless unless we are prepared to learn from others. So I do hope that, during an empty moment of your day, when standing in line when shopping, waiting for lunch, or laying awake at night, you will think of what is written here. Will recall what we discussed, what I write here now.

You grab a bunch of random sentences and pretend this gives you a reliable overal view. And yet arguments are reasoned from A, to B, and from B to C. You can't randomly read a fragment of it without deluding yourself.

You see that the people debating in the thread are eloquent, well-read and knowledgeable. You do not possess enough knowledge to refute the claims. Now you have two choices:

1 Accept the limits of your knowledge and the intelligence of others.

2 Call the whole thread "pretentious" to sustain your narcissim.

You go for option 2. Your posts are full of words but what you say is one phrase:

"I put my ego before a readiness to learn from others."

The Spanish philosopher Ortega calls the likes of you "the mass man."

His mass-man is not interested in the principles of civilization (law, politics, art, morals or religion) and turns his back on technique. He wrecks the European civilization and paves the way for a return to barbarism. Science, art and technique need the tonic SPAM created by the consciousness of authority. But, the mass-man doesn't accept the authority of another who can propose a vision, a project, a goal.

You scorn the philosophy that Western civilization was based upon to begin with: knowledge, literature, science. You use up what is there, like a parasite, without a sense of obligation to this foundation. To you it is only hogwash, because your unruly nature is not capable of digging beneath the surface. For instance, the Politeia by Plato has been read for more than two-thousand years and is still read today all across the world. Body language is only the beginning, as Plato pointed out, physical training perfects the body while philosophy completes the mind. Many begin, and few persist to the end of the road. Plato lived in a time when boys still went to complete the agoge and emerge as men, or perish.

Your mind is not capable of deep concentration; instead you are attracted to flimsy matter, like a butterfly is attracted to a neon-light. But you will never admit your flimsiness because this dents your ego. So you hide behind empty statements such as "this thread is pretentious". This thread is about developing yourself into a person who can sustain a conversation on a wide array of subjects. You are a person who judges a book by its cover as is testified by your ignorant opening statement that the original post itself won't get any woman into bed.

Yawn.

You'll get eaten alive in a Philosophy forum.

Let me lay this out as simple as possible for you. Your Sprachspiel in a PUA forum should be congruent to pick up arts. In the same light, your Sprachspiel in a philosophy forum should be congruent to a philosophy forum. In layman's terms, the way you communicate with girls should be congruent to a form that is fun to them.

If you want to dissect PUA concepts, see the concepts from different angles or point of views. See pick up from the eyes of a womanizer or a lothario. See it from the eyes of a woman. See it from the eyes of a virgin. See it from the eyes of a religious conservative. See it from the eyes of a guy who got cheated on. See it from the eyes of the guy who got somebody's woman.

You suck at metaphysical analysis and language games big time. That's why you're a massive fail when arguing with the experienced PUAs around here and I guarantee you, you'll get your ass handed to you in a Philosophy forum.

Here's one good advice fer yah: Sarge more women and stop beating your dick to Plato.

_________________
Approach. Open. Escalate. Isolate

Here are my two essential rules on texting that will save you tons of time and money:

general-questions/topic137931.html

I could cite dozens of examples on well written discussions, PUA discussions and articles by myself. In fact I received many private messages of members here and other forums complimenting me about how well I explained things and opened their eyes. But your impatient mass-man mind would not go through them anyway. So whose time are you really wasting?

From the start you mistook this thread for a thread of "talking women into bed" examples. But you are too proud to admit your mistake. Hence your "sprachspiel" has nothing to offer safe semi-funny statements conjuring up empty suppositions about me.

Here's how your arguments are shallow and pretentious. You are presenting your arguments this way:

• "Oh, yes, that Plato fuck. He was born in blah, blah, blah. He said blah, blah, blah."
  
  "Oh yeah. Steven Covey damn. He wipes his ass with recycled paper. He said blah, blah. blah."
  
  "This Baruch Spinoza Jewish-Dutch asshole shit said to this Spanish Jose Ortega y Gasset chicken shit blah, blah, blah."

I didn't see any elevation of your arguments to praxis level. You didn't do any synthesis to begin with. You're just regurgitating what you've read without digesting the knowledge and manifesting those into practice.

Now, here's a good example of a praxis based on observation: http://www2.southeastern.edu/Academics/ ... ealogy.pdf

Now, if you can explain that in a language and in a few paragraphs that the aspiring PUA noob can understand, then someone who knows something about Philosophy or two can really appreciate what you have done. You don't even need to mention the guy who did that, when he was born or what's his nationality.

Moreover, you keep on using this obsolete mass-man logical fallacy argumentum ad hominem bullshit in an era where the digital divide has narrowed tremendously.

When a pick up artist signs up and participates in a Philosophy forum, then he becomes a minority man in a community of philosophy mass-men. Since he is now in the minority, does that make him a badass in asserting his superiority? Nah. That mass-man bullshit is just a moronic security blanket that will get him killed if, say, he's a couch potato who goes inside a MMA gym and shouts at the top of his lungs, "You're all idiots motherfuckers! I'm better than all of you here."

If you still can't get it, how many pick up artists do you think are in your town or city? The figure will probably be around 1 to 2 percent. Now, when all of those 1% or 2% minorities sign up in a pick up forum, then they become the majority.

Is a shallow, pretentious "philosopher" minority more superior in pick up than those who actually go out and sarge and know how to talk to girls? That's classic Kantian metaphysical analysis fer yah without mentioning if this Kant dude is Swahili and was born in 1809 and said, "Where's the fucken toilet? I gotta pee."

I'm done with this thread.

_________________
Approach. Open. Escalate. Isolate

Here are my two essential rules on texting that will save you tons of time and money:

general-questions/topic137931.html

Right and wrong at the same time.
Yes most women (most people in general for that matter) like to talk about themselves. So encouraging them to do so is obviously the weapon of choice in seduction. But there are other "fun" subjects that can make great convos and help us getting into a chicks panties and having a spirited intellecual dispute even about highbrow topics like philosophy can do the trick if you´re dealing with someone that enjoys that kind of thing. As in all aspects of seduction, choosing the right subject of conversation is a question of calibration. If you´re dealing with a sexy simpleton quoting Kant or Spinoza and the likes will not get you anywhere, obviously. I think we can easily agree on that. But it can be very attractive to a smart educated woman that has her shit together intellectually and likes to talk about more then shopping...

If you can engage a woman in a conversation about a topic she enjoys talking about she will have a good time and you´ll have fantastic rapport. If you don´t forget to be playful and sexy while talking to her you´ll be getting to where you want to be with her. In bed.

Girls that like talking about philosophy are masculine??? That´s where you are utterly wrong, if not even sexist. Please Hellhound, you seem like such a smart guy and your posts usually have so much merit. I´m shocked to read such a stupid statement coming from you... I´m glad you at least don´t generalize this claim. I was getting worried here

I read maybe half of the original post but read the title and some responses. I'm not sure if the OP is suggesting trying to speak about philosophy with women or have an understanding of it in general. The poster that said, see things through the eyes of this person, that person, has a good point and to me that's what philosophy related to pick up is about.

Unlike everyone else, I read the whole dialogue.

To summarize, philosophy can be applied to pick-up.

As somebody who studied classical studies and comparative philosophy for pure pleasure, this isn't worth your read. Know that philosophy, especially Plato, can be applied to anything.

The Republic shouldn't be the first book you read as a PUA. First reason being that most people will not understand it. Second reason being that those who understand it won't finish it.

If you want to read something from the time period, read De Oratore. Even then, though, question your desire to read a whole book from Western philosophy. Read summaries or online posts that will CLEARLY describe principles, WITHOUT PREJUDICIAL LANGUAGE, like some posters try to do.

_________________
A morning of awkwardness is far better than a night of loneliness.

18 Body Language Mistakes I Bet You're Making

Most importantly, knowing about philosophy in general is helpful in pick up, but also in life. Practicing philosophy makes one quicker to integrate and relate knowledge from different fields. This gives your conversation a higher value.

If you choose to read Plato's Republic, make sure to read a good translation of it. I read it when I was sixteen years old without having philosophy as a subject at school and understood The Republic perfectly well.

I second this. Knowing a variety of fields will make you more interesting, smarter, and more creative. Philosophy would be a good building block. I'll always be a supporter of the Trivium.

_________________
A morning of awkwardness is far better than a night of loneliness.

18 Body Language Mistakes I Bet You're Making

philosophy can be applied to pick up.

Duh. Everyone already knows this.

I stopped reading when the OP went on his 'im smart' dogma on this woman ^_^ who obviously wasnt half as enthusiastic or invested in the interaction.


I dont see any point to this post other than to prove that the OP talks too much and grossly overthinks attraction between a man and a women.

_________________
Two words: Carpe Diem

Indeed. I could tell this amazing story about me and a friend being on holiday. We sat besides a river and ordered a drink; a couple of girls were talking on the table right next to us. Eventually I suggested opening up to them. I did it and had an amazing conversation about philosophy that lasted for three hours. Meanwhile my friend, who was talking to the other girl, couldn't get past sentences such as "what is your favourite colour?" I spoke very far in-depth with the woman about many subjects, ranging from shifting standards of journalism to the future of the European Union, to Nietzsche and John Stuart Mill. And crazier things happened to me this way, for example I met a girl in a disco who had read a book that I had also read, and a philosophical talk spun off from that while most people around us were drunk. It definitely left a good impression and we called later that night and met up during the week (another amazing story).

However the people who write things as "the author thinks too much" or "the author writes too much", well, they are a bit like my friend. They try to make other people feel insecure, and for this they use statements which are hardly substantiated. Just trying to make others feel uncomfortable out of resentment (maybe people like them are jealous that others possess this much knowledge? Or were they simply bullied at school, afraid to raise their hands to ask questions, while the smarter kids obviously did?). They spoil threads with comments such as "I am smart dogma". Truth is, they mistake insightful conversations for statements of personal beliefs or achievements. Therefore where others see an insightful conversation, they see only a statement as "I am smart." Hence they live, as Ortega argued, in a very superficial world of experience.