Lightwave comments on Missing the Trees for the Forest - Less Wrong

64 Post author: Yvain 22 July 2009 03:23AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (159)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Lightwave 22 July 2009 08:58:47PM *  2 points [-]

Btw, it's mechanical on the side of the man as well - being forced to output behavior which you normally would not, and might even object to doing.

Comment author: conchis 22 July 2009 09:43:26PM *  3 points [-]

This is one of the things that puzzles me about the whole PUA thing. Is the point of a guy changing his behaviour in such ways:

  1. to get his foot in the door, and then, once that's done go back to being "himself";
  2. to have to keep up the charade forever; or
  3. to change "himself" for good (i.e. keep up the behaviour, but in such a way that it ceases to be an unnatural charade)?

1, I can sort of understand. 2 seems like a great way to ruin your life. 3 seems like a disaster as well if it involves becoming someone who routinely does things that one now thinks are objectionable; but could be rather more positive if it instead involves, say, becoming someone who is more fun to be around and better able to enrich the life of a significant other.

Or is all of this missing the point, which is just to get laid in the short term, and not be around for the long term anyway?

Comment author: Lightwave 22 July 2009 09:53:15PM *  3 points [-]

You need to do 1 and 2 (keep the charade for as long as you need) as a temporary solution, since changing yourself permanently (acquiring the necessary social skills, building confidence, body language, etc) can't be done quickly and easily.

What is more, having an interim solution can be helpful and gives a boost to the process of improving yourself as well, e.g. even a modest success with women can increase your confidence and give you necessary social practice. It's sort of a multiplier on your efforts of improvement.

Comment author: pjeby 22 July 2009 09:56:41PM 2 points [-]

The answers to those questions are as diverse as the individuals themselves. Different teachers certainly advocate different things, but the more ethical ones advocate, as you say...

becoming someone who is more fun to be around and better able to enrich the life of a significant other.

And grasping some of the ideas involved in that has certainly been helpful in my marriage.

Comment author: Jack 23 July 2009 03:24:55AM 1 point [-]

Think of #3 the same way you think of any kind of self-improvement work (or if you like, a bootstrapping AI). There is no reason for it to be at all objectionable. People change things about themselves all the time and no one objects.

This "self" business is probably nonsense anyway.

Comment author: conchis 23 July 2009 10:36:28AM *  0 points [-]

I certainly never meant to suggest that change is objectionable per se. But saying "just think of it as self-improvement" begs the question of whether it's actually improvement. If you find yourself trying to become someone who regularly does stuff you now find objectionable (as per the comment I was responding to) then there's a decent chance you're actually engaged in an act of self-debasement instead.

Comment author: thomblake 23 July 2009 04:23:15PM 0 points [-]

begs the question

Just a reminder that "begging the question" and its variants are jargon in logic, and so it seems the colloquial meaning should be avoided here.

Comment author: conchis 26 July 2009 04:19:36PM *  0 points [-]

FWIW, I didn't intend the colloquial meaning ("raises the question"): I meant that the response "think of it as self-improvement" assumes precisely what is at issue (i.e. that the change is for the better).