Sociopath Community

Mind over Body's how I explained Sapiosexuality. Sapios can basically be attracted even to ugly motherfuckers as long as they're interesting cerebrally, but in the common mindset they could be lumped in with the bisexuals. 

Asexuals straight up miss the point, asking super fucking weird questions about it. To them, they're seeing other people going through the motions of attraction automatically while not feeling those autopilots themselves, leading many to awkwardly fumbling through it from it being the expectation. 

Asexuality as a side note should not be confused for Anhedonia, the inability to feel pleasure. They can still enjoy food and media and stuff, but when sexual themes are thrown at them it's like explaining red to someone color blind. 

giving accurate definitions to the symptoms/side effects of a disease or an event, or in this case various diseases and events doesn't describe them, which is a major error of psychiatry and psychology generally 

you keep describing me the symptoms, but i refer to the root

AizenTheTitanic said: 

you keep describing me the symptoms, but i refer to the root

What kind of root are you looking for, like what part of the brain or something? 

the brain interacts with reality, therefore the root must be a formula between the two of them interacting, just every time with different variables

AizenTheTitanic said: 

the brain interacts with reality, therefore the root must be a formula between the two of them interacting, just every time with different variables

Some quick googling has it sound like it'd be potentially related to the prefrontal cortex? 

https://www.livescience.com/24593-brain-love-dating-decisions.html

Not really my area of study though, I'm more focused on behavior patterns. 

Turncoat said: 

Chapo said: 

AizenTheTitanic said: 

being too repulsive to get sex is too rare given how this is a society of desperate "simps"

there are extremely beautiful women who turn to asexuality to increase their self esteem by convincing themselves they are "unattainable" or "different from the rest of the hoes"

 They aren’t asexual though. They’re all sluts.

They're all sluts? 

Elaborate? 

 If they put in the effort to be attractive they’re sluts. 

Chapo said: 

Turncoat said: 

Chapo said: 

AizenTheTitanic said: 

being too repulsive to get sex is too rare given how this is a society of desperate "simps"

there are extremely beautiful women who turn to asexuality to increase their self esteem by convincing themselves they are "unattainable" or "different from the rest of the hoes"

 They aren’t asexual though. They’re all sluts.

They're all sluts? 

Elaborate? 

 If they put in the effort to be attractive they’re sluts. 

You don't see them having any reason to doll themselves up other than to look for sex? 

both behavior patterns, studies... excetera excetera... are bound to be subjective and relative because we're unknown to the circumstances and natural predetermined potential of their subjects

in the end unless a study that analyzes 7 billion people, with 10 million different diets, 100 different seasons, 1000 different incomes, etc etc is done, for every single one of them, and examine everything for every case

all the studies you may bring to me, even academically signed by harvand its self or oxford can be negated with this simple logic, it's not catholic (not the religious term the other one)

the analyzation of how the brain and the body connect and interact with reality are far far far too complex to be defined accurately through science, we lack the resources, means, time, people, effort, everything

even the most tiny detail can affect everything to the point of a completely different result, like an equation

it might even be utterly impossible, achieving that level of objective truth

however...

there are philosophers who managed to come to the same conclusions scientists did, without any tools or definitions

i prefer such approach when analyzing people united with some "empathetic intuition" while also confirming the speculation with some pragamtism (like the behavior patterns) you described

and to contradict but at the same time approach a different perspective

in theory it could be possible to predict everything about a person if you had enough data about him, but again google has been trying to do something 1% as hard as that which is predicting your future purchases, and they realized 

"not enough data"

that should give you an example at least on how difficult truly is to analyze something through its symptom in psychology and behavior 

now mind all that, i agree that the majority of the behavior of people can actually fall into psychiatric terms and be predicted negated controlled as such, especially as stereotypes or herds

but for everyone? noooooooo

well if it isn't for everyone, it's not accurate enough and it can be debunked 

Turncoat said: 

Chapo said: 

Turncoat said: 

Chapo said: 

AizenTheTitanic said: 

being too repulsive to get sex is too rare given how this is a society of desperate "simps"

there are extremely beautiful women who turn to asexuality to increase their self esteem by convincing themselves they are "unattainable" or "different from the rest of the hoes"

 They aren’t asexual though. They’re all sluts.

They're all sluts? 

Elaborate? 

 If they put in the effort to be attractive they’re sluts. 

You don't see them having any reason to doll themselves up other than to look for sex? 

 Nah

AizenTheTitanic said: 

both behavior patterns, studies... excetera excetera... are bound to be subjective and relative because we're unknown to the circumstances and natural predetermined potential of their subjects

Everything's relative though, and anything 'objective' we know is largely something we're taking on faith that could be disproven through the efforts of another down the line. It's a non-argument you could pull against anything really that'd serve to shut down all room for progressing the discussion, as past a point of nitpicking everything we know is all Speculative. 

TLDR; 'Perception is Reality'. 

it might even be utterly impossible, achieving that level of objective truth

We're better off working with the tools we have, rather than lamenting over how we don't have better tools. 

there are philosophers who managed to come to the same conclusions scientists did, without any tools or definitions

Philosophy was an earlier form of Psychology, a Speculative approach that aimed to tie life purpose towards the motivations of individuals. What makes where we're headed a step forward from Philosophy is over denaturing the spirituality from it so that it's that much closer to a science, with proof that can be verified and repeated to a deeper degree than the budding stages of similar ideas. 

The tools and definitions are how we can be more precise in the room to explain what's going on, and Philosophy, if you're learning another rather than cobbling your own, has plenty of terms to learn.