I ask where is the love because I think that ironically thats what the community lacks.

The first thing we are told about the community is "Be your better self".

There are a few things that make the line work, you can improve yourself without "acting" or "trying to be someone else".

But we are forgetting something, we are not here just for us. We are dealing with second parties here. And, here's where the whole thing gets out of the picture.

A lot of women dont get aproached as much as they want to (or by the kind of persont that they want to), because men are scared of doing it. Women would love to be aproached. Since women dont get aproached its a strange event when it happens, so it might feel akward when it happens. If men aproached women more; we all win.

I learned some game theory stuff, and it says that when two players seek their own personal interest, the second best possible situation for both of them is achieved.

Women have dreams, fantasies and expectations about men. Pick up tries to use those hopes to get attraction. Wouldn't it be nice if we tried to deliver those things not to get attraction. It would be a lot better to give all that to women to make them happy.

That slight change of philosophy makes a gargantuan change if you really belive it. (cause on a side note, most people say a lot of crap that sounds nice, but when its time for action its a whole different story).

When you think "What do I say to that girl?" you are thinking about you, you just wanna get the girl. I used to be like that.

Now I think "What she wants to hear?".

When I started giving love (thats how I decided to call it) to girls like that, eveything changed.

I didnt stopped there. I started giving love to the world. Trying to make stuff better for everyone.

If everyone gives love to the humanity first, we all would be in the best possible scenario.

_________________
"[Cool is] a heavily manipulative corporate ethos. ”
Kalle Lasn

"Motherfuckers best belive in....That you are fucking with the best" - 3oh!3

Teasing is a battle plan for what Shakespeare called “the merry war.”

Robert Heinlein, I think, was the person who said it best when he stated that "No person can be truly happy, until all persons are happy"
I'm paraphrasing, but that is the essence of it.

Game theory and psychology has both "proved" that we cannot reach what we desire if we just aim for our own desires, without compassion.
People care for number one, and that is not wrong I think... but I think people have confused what number one ought to be.

Number one should be all.
But then again, I believe in the prospect of singularity, as a replacement for the current duality based world-view.
Which then would hold that you and I and he and she are all a manifestation of the same entity.

It's kinda spiritual, but again, it has been suggested that we are capable of feeling another persons emotional state, and that it affects us, more deeply than we would normally be prepared to admit.

I have a feeling that one of the things the Community may lead to is an expanded world-image, and a curiosity for further self-improvement, and that has, at least in my experience, often lead to great insight, such as that you have just shared..

And now you have people showing up, now with more impact than previously since you have information spreading with higher speed than ever before, like Eckhart Tolle and other spiritual "guides", who seem to preach a message of love, not for self, but for all.


So, spread the love, man.
(and, I just have to my fav. C&F line, because I'm totally in love with it at the moment )
"I'm proud of you"...

Pick up has some really horrible people in it and its always great to see other pua's who worries about this stuff

Shows what little you know. All Eckhat preaches is living in the moment. Forcefully spreading love would charge the polar opposites (negative and positive) hence bringing about conflict and losing the Now.

It was not Eckhart I had in mind about the message of Love.. I had two other people in mind, namely Gandhi and Bill Hicks. These are among those I referred to as spiritual "guides" as their message can be a little confusing, at times. Hicks more so than Gandhi.

Another of these spiritual "guides" is a fellow named Amidu, a Buddha.

Eckhart speaks of living in the Now.
Living in the now and accepting what is.
Of life's many forms as part of the same stream of consciousness.
Is then not the acceptance of all as it is an act of Love ?
(We may have different thoughts about what Love is, but let's not get into a fit over semantics... that would seem foolish in under a subject as this.)

Please don't launch into a personal attack over an unclear part of a post.
That would only seem foolish, and indeed, "shows what little you know". He he.. I love you to, honey, but let's not bring the insulting remarks to the dinner table.


I'm not referring to spreading any message by force.
Force would not do any good.
And I'm not talking about the conventional principle of Love, which seems to be purely based on emotion and not at all on understanding or acceptance.

To attempt to force your beliefs on others seems to, ultimately, bring no good.
This is again a form of the message given by both Gandhi and Eckhart, tho I am an expert on neither. It even seems to be the message of Jesus, though the story of him seems to have been completely and thoroughly misunderstood and used for entirely wrong purposes... such as acquiring of material riches and controlling people.
As most Governing forces tend to become.

Love is a powerful thing.

_________________
"If at first you don't succeed, try, try again.

It wasn't a personal attack at all. Just saying. Whether Eckhart is right or not I don't really care, there's very little substance to what he says anyway.

That's cool

Eckhart has a kinda way of trying to explain through not being able to.
He's not revolutionary, but it seems he is more easily accepted, because of the speed with which information is spread nowadays.

Some people are able to find great substance in what he says, though.
so saying it is little, is almost misguiding.

I haven't read his books, so Don't take me as a no.1 fan, who thinks he knows all
But I do believe I know approximately what it is he is trying to explain.

It seems to me it is over all "just" a different approach to Zen and other Eastern Mysticists goals over the ages.
It may be what some people in the west needs. (One from their own, with his own way. So it doesn't become "one of these foreign things..")

an intresting post i will always think like this now

_________________
Do not follow where the path may lead.
Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.