So I am planning on rereading "The Mystery Method" and "The Game", both books kind of take a romantic and intellectual approach to seduction. Mystery refers to Casa Nova's memoirs in the opening chapters , and I was wondering what other great minds have wrote about seduction, more on an intellectual level. I know Jean Baudrillard actually wrote a book called "Seduction" and of course J.P Sartre is notorious for his musings on love but I was wondering who could I read who would understand "game" contemporaneously.

The idea is not so much to learn but rather argue that seduction has existed for centuries. I'm taking a philosophy class this semester and seduction seems to be lumped in with the week we discuss date rape which to me seems ludicrous.

How many philosophers are there who are known to be great with women?

I'll answer that for you: very RARE.

How many performing artists (those who perform their arts in public or for public appreciation) who are known to be great with women? You can find several of them throughout history.

What's the point?

Intellectualism does not get you laid while expressing emotions or catering to the emotions is the tool of the known great seducers.

If you want to argue that seducers existed throughout history, you have King David of the bible (historiographically speaking, King David's existence is somewhat hazy although there appears to be a few archaeological evidences) who's very comfortable with his emotions and Grigori Rasputin of the Romanovs. Hint: A big cock induces different kinds of emotions in women and can get you along the corridors of power like Rasputin did.

If you want to read about the works of a great philosopher who's actually good with women and not just musing about it, dream on.

_________________
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

The point is philosophical inquiry, there doesn't have to be much else.

Also pretty sure Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, and even Soren Kirekegard were good with women.

I'm not talking about pragmatism or getting laid. The entire forum is dedicated to that. I want an objective point of view of seduction.

If they are "good" with women. Nobody would know, dude!

_________________
The secret to most things is to never hold yourself to other people's standards.

*sigh* It has been documented that Sartre was well known for being quite seductive and knowledgable in the erotic arts.

"Sartre (1905-1980) thought of himself as a 'scholarly Don Juan, slaying women through the power of his golden tongue.'(i) "

source: http://www.philoagora.com/content/view/177/106/

Anybody else want to argue with me that philosophy has no merit in seduction.

Edit: Maybe this should be in the off-topic forum?

Well, I can also think of myself as good in MMA and beat up Buakaw black and blue in Muay Thai but I won't risk it.

Giacomo Casanova, who plays violin in social gatherings, has other guys validating that he's good with women. Warren Beatty and Jerry Gershwin have several women telling in interviews that they're good with women and have awesome bedroom skills.

Your quote is a worthless piece of shit not unless Sartre has a written technique that we can field test and prove workable infield.

_________________
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

Well if we maybe broke down his philosophy, there may be a mention of an implied technique. I however doubt one of the world's greatest thinkers and supposed experts on love was not well informed in seduction. Your argument is an appeal to ignorance.

You're derailing this thread, Hellhound.

OP is discussing philosophy related to seduction, not seduction. It's a valid lounge topic.

Well, bring on some of Sartre's insights on seduction then so we can discuss it. As far as what I've read in philosophy, none of the philosophers I've read brought much to the table when it came to seduction.

You can read Casanova's work as an alternative to Sartre since it's available in the public domain. There's no intellectualism in there though.

Here's the Project Gutenberg link to Casanova's writings: http://www.freeinfosociety.com/media/pdf/4363.pdf

_________________
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

Btw, Sartre himself said in an interview that he preferred talking trivialities with a pretty face than discussing philosophy with his friends and associates, here: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2 ... 93,2335519

Taking Sartre's track in seduction, I would highly recommend 60 YoC as reading material. It's simplified minus the rambling, long winded, intellectualism common to philosophers and yet the knowledge that you can glean from 60 YoC is deeply rooted in science.

Of course, Mystery is the famous grand daddy of them all and it's recommended reading along with Neil Strauss' The Game as the basic foundation of serious seducers.

Back to Sartre's seduction style, he basically said in his interviews that he lies to women and talks (and listens to) trivialities with women. Of course, as any experienced PUAs around here will tell you, lying to women typically leads to too much drama down the line. I personally would not recommend it.

As for talking (and listening to) trivialities with women, Sartre nailed it right in the head. That's how you get laid. So I guess Sartre is legit with his own claims that he's good with women. I prefer Casanova and Warren Beatty though since the women in their lives said themselves that these two seducers are great with women.

Again, intellectualism (or too much of it) will NOT get you laid. Place your bet on emotionalism or trivialities and those are better bets.

_________________
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

Henry Kissinger, was for a time, a noted womanizer. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quote ... 01648.html

Which one of you can deny this? Though admittedly it does take a bit of ones character to seize the opportunities afforded by the attraction of power, but it can/could be said that those opportunities present themselves more often than when it is not present. IDK, I thought this might tie in with intellectualism and seduction and Mr. Secretary is certainly an intellectual.

_________________
Call me Sly.
My goal: To become a Pickup Artist in everything but name.

And yeah, This is (still) just the beginning.

To anyone actually interested in this topic, I am currently reading Robert Greene's "The Art of Seduction" and it intellectually breaks down famous historical figures who were good at seducing and why their charms worked. The book actually does mention Kissinger.

Have you read "The 50th Law"? If so, what could you take from it to seduction?

_________________
Call me Sly.
My goal: To become a Pickup Artist in everything but name.

And yeah, This is (still) just the beginning.

I haven't read it but I want to read the original 48 Laws of Power. Greene talks about how seduction works even in politics so I don't see why you couldn't apply what he says to seduction if you're clever.