Almost How to Scientifically Enthrall Any Liberated Attention Whore

The Prerequisite Philosophic Focus

It’s the planning not the plan. Most of you won’t get that. As will be evident to the few regular readers of this blog, I have been posting my mental journey into my version of red pill enlightenment. I have been applying the scientific method. There are two hats worn by red pill sages: (1) the thinking cap of the theorist, and (2) the player’s fedora of the practitioner.

Red pill self-improvement requires the feedback loop of theorist and practitioner.

The feedback loop requires arduous manual effort. You will not pragmatically understand the theory without field testing bit by bit. If you did understand pragmatically, you would not have unmet needs within the raison d’etre of red pill enlightenment. Are you wasting your time because you are validating your impeccable enlightenment? Move up in your life. Are you wasting your time because you are validating your inaction? Live your life.

Enlightenment comes from invalidation of lies more than validation of truths.

Let women burn away the lies of who you are, if you can. Go by what they do with their pussy proximity not what they say.

Correct focus is not only thinking about what matters in the moment but also not thinking about what does not matter in the same moment. Unbeknownst to most of us in practice if not in theory, correct focus is not just correct thinking. It is selective actuation of all available mental processes, of reason, emotion, and instincts. English does not allow for a verb to express that with clarity. Think in ideas not vocabulary. The term ‘thinking’ is abused by sheeple to abuse the civilized producer into submission. Vocabulary should serve the ideas of the problem-solution domain.

For those NTs who regularly read this blog, this post is directed to you. I am documenting a pseudo-proprietary insight, to wit, what I think will be a characteristic foundation of my game. If you have been following along with my blog and the ideas expressed, then I think you will get the implications enough to apply the scientific method to your self-improvement and social development. I write this for me to do just that as well as any readers enough like me to do the same.

Potentially the Next Charles Darwin

Michael S. A. Graziano is a neuroscientist who wrote a book called Consciousness and the Social Brain (c2013). I now present my review to explain the parts that I believe bring scientific precision to what I have been trying to do to invoke a connection reality with female targets.

The book is about 200% more verbose than the serviceable content justifies. There is a shit load of chaff. Clearly, most scientists are not philosophers, and I do not besmirch the author. Most researchers styled scientists are really technocrats beholden to the globalist elite. I am not going to burden this essay with a justification of that assertion. The red pill enlightened will be able to deduce that the chaff is there to chip away at emotional imperatives planted by globalist elite and held dearly by sheeple.

The thematic idea of the book is the attention schema. It is a very simple and very profound idea.

The red pill community with run with the concept of an attention schema or fade away. Attention schema theory is red pill future.

The chapters worth reading, but not without annoying chaff, of the eighteen in total are:

  • Ch. 1: “The Magic Trick”
  • Ch. 2: “Introducing the Theory”
  • Ch. 6: “Illusions and Myths”
  • Ch. 16: “Simulating Other Minds”
  • Ch. 17: “Some Spiritual Matters”

If chapters 16 and 17 are confusing after reading only the previous chapters 1, 2 and 6; obviously one may benefit from reading the other previous chapters in order until the ramifications become clear.

I will now quote some passages that exemplify the elemental ideas that interest my red pill research into sheeple seduction and control.

Graziano finally expresses the big idea clearly on page 69, at the very beginning of chapter 6:

The theory proposed in this book can be summarized in five words: awareness is an attention schema. A schema is an informational model, constantly recomputed, that represents something worth tracking and predicting.

Clearly, the sheeple don’t want to loose their spiritual or gina tingles. Sheeple stupidity is intelligent, active, willful ignorance. The underestimation of human stupidity is why otherwise good Western men have been socially defeated.

Chapter 16 ends with a section entitled “Simulation of One’s Own Mind: The Resonance Loop.” This is the penultimate paragraph, on page 195:

In this hypothesis, a fundamental difference exists between constructing a model of someone else’s mind and constructing a model of your own mind. In constructing a model of someone else’s mind, there is no direct mechanism for that model to alter the other person’s mind. The loop is open, not closed. There is no resonance. But in constructing a model of your own mind, the model alters the thing that it depicts. The model is both a perceptual representation and an executive controller. It is a description and an actor. It is like the mission statement of a company that, by describing the company, makes it so.

Imagine looking at yourself inside an infinity mirror.

The infinity of self-awareness is spirituality.

From page 221, in chapter 17:

It is trite to say that we live on in the people who remember us. But the theory of consciousness described in this book suggests that there is some literal truth to the idea. Fuzzy copies of our conscious minds exist in all people who knew us.

Social recursion is much more problematic to accommodate but no less qualitatively potent. The difference is only more nodes and connections that increase the chances of attenuation and outright loop incompletion. The potential of spirituality by sensational feedback amplification remains. A form of indefinite social recursion is facilitated by the MSM news predicting the future that its message helps craft by Hegelian dialectic. How would you explain the overwhelming charisma of Jesus, Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Muhammad, Napoleon, Hitler, Gandhi? What made women hysterical at the sight of The Beatles? What made plenty of blacks hysterical about the 2008 election of BO to POTUS. What innervates the success of modern politicians with the modern body politic in the post-feminism West?

Now put 2 and 2 together. Add the reflexive infinity of individual spirituality to social awareness, and what do you get?

The Locality of Spirituality

So far, this is all philosophy but no science. The truth of these propositions is sufficient (in my mind) to prove the attention schema theory is necessarily correct: (1) human brains are organic behavioral control devices of fixed calculation and flexible computation, and (2) human brains are a product of evolution. Evolution works in small steps such that each and every step proves to be an adaptive advantage of itself. Evolution is a process of conservative, incremental miserliness. A law of nature is that the essence of life is profit. Superstition allows for a primitive type of social coordination. Focus is a competitive advantage with no developmental bounds in sight. The development of selective social and individual foci must happen if life evolves. Humans are the earth’s apex species blessed and burdened with the cudgels of superlative but limited attention.

From page 71, of chapter 6:

Electrical stimulation was applied to the surface of the cortex on the right side of the brain in a specific region called the temporo-parietal junction (TPJ). The stimulation temporarily scrambled the natural signals in this brain area. As a result, an out-of-body experience was induced. … The stimulation evidently interfered with the machinery that normally assigns a location to one’s own mind.

Spirituality is thought to, but more importantly is felt to, transcend the spacial bounds of physical beings from which they supposedly emanate. The most staunchly tribal reds are those most resistant to assimilation into higher cultural order, are prone to alcoholism, and love their peyote (Oklevueha Native American Church). Have you ever lost yourself in your lover’s eyes? I have had a few transcendental experiences by serendipity, and I expect you have too. The excitement about tantric sex could be a bumbling unscientific application of social spirituality.

Thought not mentioned in the book as I recall, spirituality is thought and felt to transcend time just like space. Einstein gave us the concept of spacetime, though the reality of space and time with its actual properties is not part of any mere biological basis of our awareness of space and time. The popular general conception of spirituality, my personal sense of spirituality, and presumably yours happen to transcend both space and time, for whatever reasons of implementation.

PUAs bounce locations with target to create comfort more quickly. The increased novelty over the same time period creates more memories to track what happened in comfort. I believe the time spent together will seem to be shorter in the moment and to have been longer in hindsight than it really was. I theorize the effectiveness would be due to the target’s attention being diverted from tracking a tedious awareness of time to recording more situational details of social experience from which future projections will be extrapolated.

The point is that arousing stimulation taken to spiritual heights will presumably disengage a person’s perception of time just like space.

I recently wrote a post entitled “Connection Reality Is Queen”. I had not read Consciousness and the Social Brain at that time. I am pleased that my social science is confirmed by actual experimentation on live monkey and human brains. The idea that I am getting at in this post promises to be useful at all major stages of sexual seduction (attraction, comfort, sex). Cult of personality may become my signature technique.

It might be tempting to use deep connection reality as a crutch that blocks development of a well-rounded social skill set. Note to self: Don’t do that.

Progressively Culled as Before or Entirely Eliminated

As futuristic speculation, Graziano asserts on page 220, in chapter 17: “And an aware computer could be a useful tool, just as modern computers are, without malevolently choosing on its own to kill off anything.” I completely disagree. Any awareness functionally similar to human awareness is NOT intrinsically benign. I repeat from a previous post that friends have compatible survival and replication strategies.

So far, evolution of material technology has been languorously slow but automatic by mindless natural evolution and conspicuously fast but manual by conscious human engineering. AI with awareness comparable to humans is a sufficient basis for evolution made incredibly efficient by automation that logically eliminates random trial and error with an overhead of only cognitive description. I remind you of Moore’s law. The same philosophical point, albeit with a different concrete example, was made in the first Jurassic Park movie.

The current nascent splash of rationalism or some other timely recrudescence will become a wave of conquest, or all humanity will be extinguished as a species universal lowest common denominator without vital profit.

—‘Reality’ Doug, 15 July 2015

Advertisements

About ‘Reality’ Doug

I'm feed up with herd people, so civil and uncivilized, these feckless barbarians with manicures. Where is Galt's Gulch? and where are the people to go there? Who am I? Who is John Galt?
Gallery | This entry was posted in PUA Game and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s