This brings to mind an interesting meta-discussion that I've been wanting to have, and perhaps it has already been done and those of you who've been on the forum could point me to where to find it, but here is the question it is centered around:

There's obviously a lot of PUA material out there now. Not all of it is very scientific. How does one sift through it to find the stuff that is actually worth reading?

I would think that the best material out there has GOT to be thoroughly investigated by conducting actual research in the field. Just because I'm a man that doesn't qualify me to speak on behalf of all men. And just because you're a woman that doesn't qualify you to speak on behalf of all women. There is no substitute for in-field research with lots of different people. A lone individual's opinion, while interesting, is irrelevant (unless he can cite data to support it). We all want somewhat different things. I think good PUA literature comes from a place of understanding, and that can only happen if the authors have conducted in-depth research with the same level of rigor you might expect to see from a professional social scientist. A good social scientist does not merely go with her "gut feeling" or try to expand on what she believes to be "common sense", she goes out there in the field and collects real, actual data, only forming theories after a wealth of data naturally leads to it.

One thing I dislike about simple "rule following" is that without a theory to ground the rules, you have no explanation of why the rules are what they are or when to break them (and no set of rules is ever 100% perfect--there are exceptions to every rule out there and knowing the theory behind it might help you learn when to spot such an exception).

I am curious how many actual interviews Fein and Schneider conducted in doing the research for their book. How many social science publications did they read? Did they consider alternative points of view to their theory and do they have data and arguments to refute them? If this is like most pop-psychology self-help books out there, I suspect the answer to these questions is probably "few to none".

There are lots of little nuggets of wisdom in the PUA world out there, but unless we can take a solid scientific approach to this the field of PUA is not going to advance any; our understanding of the process of romantic/sexual attraction won't increase. And since everyone's goals are different, knowledge/understanding is what needs to be gotten from the PUA literature, not a one-size-fits-all set of rules for people who have vastly differing goals to all follow. I am hesitant to go out there and buy PUA materials for exactly this reason. I need to have good reasons to think it is quality stuff before I'll buy it.

(This thread has been split from the original. If the poster wishes for a different name for the thread, PM Hobbit)

_________________
I think, therefore I am.

If you haven't read 'The Game' by Neil strauss then do that, this book is a classic in terms of comedy entertainment value (if you aren't a geek.) It's also a great motivator and reads like an entertaining story from a PUA University lecturer.

'The Mystery Method' is a great resource for nightclub, bar etc pick up locations with great advice on the initial stage of seduction, openers, DHV etc but rubbish for relationship advice and languistic communication with women (or conversation to make that more understandable lol).

Check out Ross Jeffries (the creepy hypnotist guy) stuff for info on womens psychology and gaining emotional connection on 1 on 1 conversations.

I've just ordered a book by Kezia Noble, which you might not be surprised to hear is from a women's perspective.

I can't really comment to much on Kezia's and Jeffries newest books as I've only just ordered them. However Jeffries is a trusted PUA for the psychological stuff and is an old timer in the field. Not sure what Kesia's book will be like, although it's had some decent reviews on amazon and I know that she is a colleague of Gamblers in the British playing field + the fact that it's from a womens perspective is interesting.

Anyway hope this advice has been of some use.

Peace

Scientific Research is what I want more PUA's to be concerned with as well.

PU however has largely been under-ground, there hasn't been much testing of the more asbtract theories, but to PU, the theory behind it is irrelevant.

Most well known and respected PUA's and teachers for that matter are in such a position not because they have developed accurate theories but becuase they or their theories contain behaviours that get results.

Short hand, more PUA's are starting to use psychological studies, (Adam Lyons I believe has sued studies to prove his work), but previous PU has been built on the basis of "what works" not neccessarily "which theory has been proven".

Gunwitch uses scientific grounding, i dont think he's done studies himself but 'neuron mirroring' is pretty scientificly sound (as far as anything pua related is anyway) its also free and anybody whos actually tried it, gives good ratings. I hear it takes more rejection though.

He shot a girl in the face but im sure that isnt to do with his method.

_________________
"You don't want girls to think you suck dick at fucking pussy"
-Seth (Superbad)

Read Sinn's Game Doctrine, it's free and it explains all the basic methods, and how to develop your own game, really helpful material.

Cheers

_________________
V3nu

What?

_________________
"Damn girl, whatchoo want from me, I'll give you anything. You want any kind of subscription, to a magazine? Give you a potato? A mask of some sort?" -Rob Cantor

http://www.ktvz.com/news/26342408/detail.html

_________________
Journal/Blog: journal-little-panda-vt135329.html

Hey finn, we meet again

I agree with you about the scientific research point it would be nice to rule out the bullsh*t theories. But back to the OP and his question, surely it is more important than anything to sarge and see what works best for you. Pick up and the theories behind what works and what doesn't are just guidelines and its not one size fits all. So for all the scientific research and theory learnt, a PUA can still be shit, even if he has had experience before, because the material isn't his style and he's just following the material blindly.

I dunno if im write but please critique

_________________
Impossible is just a big word thrown around by small people - Muhammad Ali

I read that too on eseduce, I was like wtf, sooo strange!!

_________________
V3nu

A quick review of the books I've read on PU material

Neil Strauss, [u]The Game[/u] - Entertaining story. Not guide material but motivating and interesting

[u]The Mystery Method[/u], by Mystery - Good for nightclub sarging, playful methods. A bit to modelled and un-natural. Very much geared towards Mystery's entertainer, magician character. I have to say that I haven't practiced The Mystery Method so this opinion is purely based on the context and style of the book.

Kezia Noble, [u]15 Steps to becoming a master seducer[/u] - Good refresher. Pointers to correct bad habits. Good for training on keeping a natural style, and good tips for building rapport. A lot of waffle in between key points, and common sense suggestions. Maybe 15 steps should be cut to just 3 or 4 important steps.

Ross Jeffries, [u]Secrets of speed seduction mastery[/u] - A very interesting concept. First four chapters are insightful. Has a tendency to use unneccesary metaphors and can sometimes feel like he's marketing his $1,000's coaching courses. Would recommend this book as better to borrow, simply to learn and memorise all the concepts and advice in the first four chapters. The rest of the book is answers to his students. He's a strange chap, this is easy to see in the way he writes the book. Very difficult and confusing to master and get to grip with his concepts simply from reading the book.

Wouldn't checking out a few poo ah books and writing down what they have in common down, and use those as principles where you tailor yourself around?


As there would be a reason why some stuff gets repeated over and over.


Kino for example, you'll find that in almost ANY pick up book you'll read.

For the same reasons science can't really study or prove NLP (yet people swear it works), I doubt they could study or prove pick up theory either.

I've studied basically all the guru's. For me the best idea's out their are from RSD and everything you needs in blueprind decoded, but I'd have never got the confidence to even try or start without mystery method and the training wheels in routines. About the only real science I have heard in any product was on biologist/psychologist deanglo had speak. David Miller was his name. Basically said the brain was developed as sexual ornamintation like peacocks tails and and you could use it to overcome the other factors of biology and attraction like looks through things like humor or alpha behaviors. Closest science I've heard to support pua theory.