67 replies to this topic

[TheFountain]

I get to decide....lol..-to the threads question....no really here people...acting cool and taking leadership with things as long as what's right to do (correct) is good and ok....but also I personally am and enjoy having long hair plus a straight fringe and looking attractive like a girl and acting cutesy and no muscle and normal stomach and arms and with "your", very/most attractive opposite gender partner would be very great ([where the body gets its own attraction]-your body once done creating you took your most attractive look from you, and diffienterated it to the opposite gender [hence they look alike] and you are left seeing your look as the most attractive same gender look that's really attractive as long as has da hair, and is indeed "just" acceptable as the same gender, at least to straight people, but is very attractive while just acceptable, and from what I can tell also you look like a girl to yourself and well that's why your ok with girls and yourself~ Or vice versa boys and yourself~]

 

Basically then I want every man to call themself a boy for now on and like japanese peoplesss have long hair and fringe and act just like a girl and nice too and have no muscle like explained above, but were straight here ok, this is straight...and then when with opposite gender its fun too...simply boy orrr girl can be taking charge or cute and girly...you have to warp your mind to being fully capable of anything, you are A consciousness! ...*restrictions about body still apply* for ex. still must still be straight with 2 opposite gender bodies. And ya boys and girls are the same they should both have both of eachothers traits and acts and to be neutral to either doing at any moment both or both at once, I do-am.

 

Other than that I'm mental, well wrong...but I'm def sure I'm right ya.....Or maybe I am almost like a hybrid transient and a girl look but a boy consciousness and or brain and maybe even a genius brain even more than average boys, but probably just got other skills and think different and am very helpful figuring out everything as in my threads...also unless girls haven't been brought up right to be acting alike with everything to boys with the average brain capabilities and have same capabilities and then I'd be only having a girl looking body, besides if a more powerful brain with it's consciousness attached is even possible which could indeed be...although one day we will be able to be such a cool thing OR can be a actual girl and still attracted to girls but at this point want the other girl to be the same and it's straight then cause both are attracted to girl face... or if normal girls brain and or consciousness is not as high, then any boy anddd girl can one day have a boys brain and or consciousness also then, and be a boy or girl attracted to opposite gender which is your gender that you are and it'd be straight, and then everybody could be a big 50 billion family ay, ay?......but it doesn't matter because I'm on to something about living forever, I'm on to stuff

 

K I gotta get back to living forever now...

You might want to fix your translator. 

 

All I am getting is hipster this and hipster that. 

[ADVANCESSSS]

I'm only english language.

 

I'm not hipster or anything nope, I myself am straight and also an intellectual.

 

There is no alpha anything...everyone is conscious and a consciousness that is in the head...everyone..is equal....

[Strangelove]

 

What I was trying to get at is that by interpreting social relations through the lens of hierarchy you display an implicit concern for this hierarchy and where you stand within it. This is reactive, not originary, behaviour. Alpha only makes sense as a term that relates us to one another in a social setting, so by using it you affirm your relationship as 'above others', not as good in yourself. Thus you implicitly compare yourself to others, meaning you feel the need for validation on some level. As long as you're playing the game, you've lost. You're speaking the language of the herd. The word alpha implies a discourse about worth being relative to social standing, not a self-determined feature. Yet to be self-determined could be called alpha (if we're playing that game), and to be in thrall to the valuations of others is non-alpha. Being awesome requires no validation, for why would you even try to validate yourself to someone if you were secure in yourself, and thus why would you even adopt the term alpha? Do you see what I mean?

 

I am getting from this a Nitzschean influence and something beyond maybe? What else? The subject matter is interesting and I like where this is going... 

 

 

What I meant above is, if there is any literature with "obsessing" (that can be functional or no) being Alpha, famous, very high social status etc. for example

 

http://www.amazon.co...d=I1902MTQM2U6B

[OpaqueMind]

 

 

What I was trying to get at is that by interpreting social relations through the lens of hierarchy you display an implicit concern for this hierarchy and where you stand within it. This is reactive, not originary, behaviour. Alpha only makes sense as a term that relates us to one another in a social setting, so by using it you affirm your relationship as 'above others', not as good in yourself. Thus you implicitly compare yourself to others, meaning you feel the need for validation on some level. As long as you're playing the game, you've lost. You're speaking the language of the herd. The word alpha implies a discourse about worth being relative to social standing, not a self-determined feature. Yet to be self-determined could be called alpha (if we're playing that game), and to be in thrall to the valuations of others is non-alpha. Being awesome requires no validation, for why would you even try to validate yourself to someone if you were secure in yourself, and thus why would you even adopt the term alpha? Do you see what I mean?

 

I am getting from this a Nitzschean influence and something beyond maybe? What else? The subject matter is interesting and I like where this is going... 

 

 

What I meant above is, if there is any literature with "obsessing" (that can be functional or no) being Alpha, famous, very high social status etc. for example

 

http://www.amazon.co...d=I1902MTQM2U6B

 

 

I'm definitely influenced by Nietzsche in my thinking. Looking at it this thought it somewhat reflects the dichotomy of master/slave morality. The question is, are you actively engaged in shaping your existence, or are you passively determined by forces beyond your control? Of course, we can't extricate ourselves from wider forces entirely (in the physical sense), but we can take charge of our little corner of the universe if we are inclined to do so.

 

There is also a third, more powerful way, which is to learn how to dissolve the tension which ensnares us into mindless hungering after things and status... this way is meditation. Even the power of the greatest will crumble in the briefest passage of time. True power is freedom from the impulse to control, as this impulse is a symptom of weakness, fear and paranoia. When we cave in to an impulse, like the impulse for social status, we are being fundamentally reactive, just puppets to the whims that bind us.

 

Most people would say that someone is alpha who is self-directive in a social sense, that is, free from the whims of others. But I think the mental perspective is much deeper and more important, not least for significance and power of mind. Who really gives a sweet fuck if someone thinks your cool if you can't even control your own mind?

 

Sorry, got a bit off track there... To answer your question, Buddhist philosophy and my personal experience of learning to let go in meditation are the influences on this line of thinking.

 

I also see all categories (and therefore also language) as fundamentally arising out of, and creating, tension, both mentally and physically. Why do we divide the world? So we can get a better grasp on it, to control it. Why do we control the world? At base, to ensure our continuing survival, that is, to maintain our physical integrity as organisms. Categorisation is thus a scarcity response - "something is wrong, I need to figure out what it is".

 

The sense of self as cut off from the world, the severance of the universe in two, is the originary duality which grounds all others. Without this there is no reactive impulse to use the tools of abstraction and language. A tool is something we use to get somewhere... but where could the totality of existence possibly go? Next door? Full relaxation is the realisation of this fundamental unity. You can see why duality, or categorization, is a state of tension.

 

When everything is running smoothly, linguistic and self-constructs usually dissolve and the myopia of 'gotta fix this' expands into a wider field of experience. The chronic state of tension many people exist in today prohibits moving into this state. Until we learn to relax our minds fully, to let go of the push to control the world in whatever way, we will never be free from the compulsion to be what we are not.

[pheanix997]

What I was trying to get at is that by interpreting social relations through the lens of hierarchy you display an implicit concern for this hierarchy and where you stand within it. This is reactive, not originary, behaviour. Alpha only makes sense as a term that relates us to one another in a social setting, so by using it you affirm your relationship as 'above others', not as good in yourself. Thus you implicitly compare yourself to others, meaning you feel the need for validation on some level. As long as you're playing the game, you've lost. You're speaking the language of the herd. The word alpha implies a discourse about worth being relative to social standing, not a self-determined feature. Yet to be self-determined could be called alpha (if we're playing that game), and to be in thrall to the valuations of others is non-alpha. Being awesome requires no validation, for why would you even try to validate yourself to someone if you were secure in yourself, and thus why would you even adopt the term alpha? Do you see what I mean?

 
I am getting from this a Nitzschean influence and something beyond maybe? What else? The subject matter is interesting and I like where this is going... 

The whole "being-for-others" and "being-for-oneself" seems like the ideas of Sarte. I agree with this line of thinking, however psychologists have pointed out that Sarte probably had an avoidant attachment that plagued him with terrible feelings of loneliness and isolation. I think a healthy balance has to be struck; ideally this happens after a person has achieved a strong self-identity - independent of the judgements of others - who then feels free enough to connect socially without fears of engulfment or judgement or abandonment. It's these lucky souls who, IMHO, we dub the "alphas." They neither look for approval, nor isolate themselves within a "lone wolf's" existence. They are the leaders; they're autonomous, authentic people who also have the ability to bring those same attributes out in others, who show their gratitude by following the alpha. This echoes the sentiments of some other posters above.

Edited by pheanix997, 09 June 2014 - 08:25 PM.

[Lobotomy]

This what a somewhat embarassing thread to read.

 

People getting all caught up in arbitrary nomenclature when they don't understand that alpha/beta is just that. Not getting enough tail? Have a sit-down with yourself and find your deficit. Not fit enough? Get some exercise in, you bum! Not socially adept? Go to a few parties and talk to everyone like you would a casual friend. This isn't really that difficult people, just add introspection and action.

 

My what big entitlement some of you have. Not necessarily 'you', as in Longecity, but 'you', as in, all of the people who complain about never finding a mate/expecting all of their preferred gender to drop what they're doing and spread their legs for you upon realization that you're in the room. You're a part of the problem.

Edited by Lobotomy, 15 June 2014 - 08:38 PM.

[mtn2011]

Women determine who an alpha male is, an alpha male is a sexual status, they get the top choice of women. This explains why they are sometime hated by some betas and most omegas.

 

It is based on looks, confidence, fitness, and leadership qualities. Steve Jobs is not an example of an alpha male, being successful is not an indicator, there are plenty of very poor people who are alpha males.

 

In reality it is difficult to be a 100% alpha male and live in our society, you must adapt to various traits. Women are attracted to alphas but want the stability of betas, in order to be successful it is best to adopt traits of both. Being 100% alpha will mean you get laid a lot but can not find someone to settle down with, being 100% beta will get you a wife who craves alpha and who will more inclined to have an affair. Being 100% omega you would likely never find a mate and those with a high percentage of beta or omega would likely be subservient to his mate if he found one.

 

An alpha male will always have a lot of potential mates so he will be top dog in a relationship.

 

 

 

 

Edited by mtn2011, 16 June 2014 - 02:54 PM.

[TheFountain]

^^ Bunch of know it all bullshit. 

[TheFountain]

Sociology is a delicate 'science' that is filled with gaping ass wholes.

 

And this what determines an 'Alpha' male, down to the finite degree bullshit is one of them.

 

Anyone who sits there and tries to dispense finite details of what makes an 'Alpha' man is full of L. Ron Hubbard sized shit. 

 

I am a fuckin Alpha! And there isn't dick any of you can say or do about it. Hehe!

[Lewis Carroll]

Women determine who an alpha male is, an alpha male is a sexual status, they get the top choice of women. This explains why they are sometime hated by some betas and most omegas.

 

It is based on looks, confidence, fitness, and leadership qualities. Steve Jobs is not an example of an alpha male, being successful is not an indicator, there are plenty of very poor people who are alpha males.

 

In reality it is difficult to be a 100% alpha male and live in our society, you must adapt to various traits. Women are attracted to alphas but want the stability of betas, in order to be successful it is best to adopt traits of both. Being 100% alpha will mean you get laid a lot but can not find someone to settle down with, being 100% beta will get you a wife who craves alpha and who will more inclined to have an affair. Being 100% omega you would likely never find a mate and those with a high percentage of beta or omega would likely be subservient to his mate if he found one.

 

An alpha male will always have a lot of potential mates so he will be top dog in a relationship.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I completely disagree. I think either sex will arrive at the same conclusion in regards to whether or not someone posses Alpha "status". Being Alpha is determined, in my opinion, when one posses certain characteristics: individuality, confidence, and a dream-chaser attitude. I think these characteristics create the Alpha persona or "status". A result is indeed often sex appeal. All of this feeds the jealousy and "hatred" which you mentioned. 

 

Steve Jobs was most definitely an Alpha. He, without a doubt, possessed all the characteristics found in an Alpha.

 

Oh, and money IS NOT an indicator of success. I agree that success is not necessarily an indicator of being Alpha; however, I think it is quite commonly found in Alphas. 

 

Edit: I do agree with this statement... "An alpha male will always have a lot of potential mates so he will be top dog in a relationship."

Edited by MajinBrian, 16 June 2014 - 03:45 PM.

[mtn2011]

When someone gets that agitated then something must have struck a nerve.   What I said was no more "know it all" than anyone else here that posted,it is a view shared by a lot of people. If you don't agree with me then that is fine, I don't need validation. I also never said I was alpha either.

 

I continue to disagree Steve Jobs was alpha, he was a nerd who became very successful, otherwise he would have been average or below to women. Nothing wrong with nerds by the way. An alpha male would be sexually successful regardless of his financial success or not, they are attractive to women on a primal level.

Edited by mtn2011, 16 June 2014 - 03:59 PM.

[mtn2011]

I also agree with you Fountain that alpha males are not bullies, it would be aggressive beta male jockeying for position that are aggressive. The most aggressive obnoxious people I have ever encountered are some of the omega males in the IT field, they need to make a big display to overcome their fears and weaknesses.  An example of an alpha male would be James Bond, not an asshole by any means but cool and collected, decisive, leader, irresistible to women.  I don't think alpha male equals asshole.

Edited by mtn2011, 16 June 2014 - 04:12 PM.

[mtn2011]

there are ways to emphasize and build your alpha characteristics and keep your beta tendencies at a minimum: altering your behaviors, become very fit, successful, etc. So I don't think necessarily you are destined to be one thing forever. It's possible through his success Steve Jobs learned to become more alpha and exhibited those characteristics more and is perceived more as one as a result, I just don't think he is naturally alpha dominant. 

Edited by mtn2011, 16 June 2014 - 04:41 PM.

[TheFountain]

I am an Alpha because that is what I choose to be. 

 

The be all, end all, right now! GAAA!

[mtn2011]

cool, it's probably a healthy attitude, more men need to embrace their alpha masculine side these days

Edited by mtn2011, 18 June 2014 - 06:20 PM.

[sthira]

If social traits of alpha (human) males are anything like our cousin alpha (baboon) males, then they're the most stressed out individuals in the troup. As leaders they may have higher reproductive success; but often pay with more violence and shorter lives. With bonobos and pan paniscus (even closer relatives) the story is similar, and filled with even more complex nuance.

[TheFountain]

If social traits of alpha (human) males are anything like our cousin alpha (baboon) males, then they're the most stressed out individuals in the troup. As leaders they may have higher reproductive success; but often pay with more violence and shorter lives. With bonobos and pan paniscus (even closer relatives) the story is similar, and filled with even more complex nuance.

 

I am not sure what the point or conclusion of this is? 

 

That enjoyment comes at a price? 

[sthira]

If social traits of alpha (human) males are anything like our cousin alpha (baboon) males, then they're the most stressed out individuals in the troup. As leaders they may have higher reproductive success; but often pay with more violence and shorter lives. With bonobos and pan paniscus (even closer relatives) the story is similar, and filled with even more complex nuance.

 
I am not sure what the point or conclusion of this is? 
 
That enjoyment comes at a price? 

You're an alpha male.  So you're surrounded by beta males.  Some betas behave friendly toward you; other betas do not.  As alpha, you're always worried (elevated glucocorticoids) about who's friendly, who's not. And while you're successfully copulating and bearing young, you're probably operating with high worry hormones. We might hypothesize that your (alpha) glucocorticoids are more elevated than your beta cohorts. We want to know if this is conditional upon social status. So we collect samples from you and your beta friends to get a grip on what's going on inside of you (in terms of health and longevity -- since this website concerns itself with health and longevity).  We'd like to know: are elevated hormones more or less conducive to prolonging your brief little alpha life?  

[mtn2011]

I don't think we live in the same kind of environment as baboons, there is not really the same kind of threat from betas.

[Soma]

This should really be moved to "other conversations". This certainly should never have been posted in the philosophy section. Hopefully a moderator can move this to the appropriate forum.

Edited by Soma, 20 June 2014 - 08:40 PM.

[TheFountain]

I don't think we live in the same kind of environment as baboons, there is not really the same kind of threat from betas.

 

I would suppose most of the guys who shoot up schools are beta's. 

 

But this idea that beta's don't get girls is non-sense. If they didn't we would not be 7 billion strong as a species. 

 

Unless you're suggesting Alpha's each have about a million mates. 

This should really be moved to "other conversations". This certainly should never have been posted in the philosophy section. Hopefully a moderator can move this to the appropriate forum.

 

No, this is definitely a philosophical discussion. Stop whining because we aren't dissecting descartes or something.

[mtn2011]

 

I don't think we live in the same kind of environment as baboons, there is not really the same kind of threat from betas.

 

I would suppose most of the guys who shoot up schools are beta's. 

 

But this idea that beta's don't get girls is non-sense. If they didn't we would not be 7 billion strong as a species. 

 

Unless you're suggesting Alpha's each have about a million mates. 

This should really be moved to "other conversations". This certainly should never have been posted in the philosophy section. Hopefully a moderator can move this to the appropriate forum.

 

No, this is definitely a philosophical discussion. Stop whining because we aren't dissecting descartes or something.

 

 

The guys that shoot up schools would probably fall more in the omega male category, the ones that are truly socially inept, damaged, etc.

 

Betas are not socially inept they are just lower in the hierarchy.  Sure betas definitely mate, the vast majority of men are betas. But they are no threat to the alpha, the alpha gets the pick of the litter while the beta has to take the leftovers.

 

Women tend to seek the alphas when they are young and in their prime and then when they get older and less fertile and less attractive, they look for a stable beta to provide for them. They often still seek or desire the alphas on the side and sometimes  get impregnated by the alpha and have the beta raise the child unknowingly. Beta men are frequently the victims of divorce as the women discover the betas don't do it for them as much as the alphas did in their youth.

 

At least this is social dynamic since feminism, previously women did not have as easy an opportunity to branch swing due to social standards and the legal structure.

 

Edited by mtn2011, 23 June 2014 - 02:05 PM.

[TheFountain]

^^^ Non-sense. I see plenty of young, pretty females with "beta" types. There is no specific linear order to this phenomenon. 

 

I think we all need to stop acting like we know what the fuck we are talking about. All I know is me. And I am Alpha! 

 

Whatever someone else is is up to them. 

[addx]

I'm definitely influenced by Nietzsche in my thinking. Looking at it this thought it somewhat reflects the dichotomy of master/slave morality. The question is, are you actively engaged in shaping your existence, or are you passively determined by forces beyond your control? Of course, we can't extricate ourselves from wider forces entirely (in the physical sense), but we can take charge of our little corner of the universe if we are inclined to do so.
 
There is also a third, more powerful way, which is to learn how to dissolve the tension which ensnares us into mindless hungering after things and status... this way is meditation. Even the power of the greatest will crumble in the briefest passage of time. True power is freedom from the impulse to control, as this impulse is a symptom of weakness, fear and paranoia. When we cave in to an impulse, like the impulse for social status, we are being fundamentally reactive, just puppets to the whims that bind us.
 
Most people would say that someone is alpha who is self-directive in a social sense, that is, free from the whims of others. But I think the mental perspective is much deeper and more important, not least for significance and power of mind. Who really gives a sweet fuck if someone thinks your cool if you can't even control your own mind?
 
Sorry, got a bit off track there... To answer your question, Buddhist philosophy and my personal experience of learning to let go in meditation are the influences on this line of thinking.
 
I also see all categories (and therefore also language) as fundamentally arising out of, and creating, tension, both mentally and physically. Why do we divide the world? So we can get a better grasp on it, to control it. Why do we control the world? At base, to ensure our continuing survival, that is, to maintain our physical integrity as organisms. Categorisation is thus a scarcity response - "something is wrong, I need to figure out what it is".
 
The sense of self as cut off from the world, the severance of the universe in two, is the originary duality which grounds all others. Without this there is no reactive impulse to use the tools of abstraction and language. A tool is something we use to get somewhere... but where could the totality of existence possibly go? Next door? Full relaxation is the realisation of this fundamental unity. You can see why duality, or categorization, is a state of tension.
 
When everything is running smoothly, linguistic and self-constructs usually dissolve and the myopia of 'gotta fix this' expands into a wider field of experience. The chronic state of tension many people exist in today prohibits moving into this state. Until we learn to relax our minds fully, to let go of the push to control the world in whatever way, we will never be free from the compulsion to be what we are not.

This is probably the best post I've ever seen written on this forum and is on track with one of the most inspiring texts I've read online.

http://www.thenewyog...g/use&abuse.htm

[Keizo]

A common and popular definition by pick up artists and similar: Whoever fornicates the most with promiscuous women. Since the very basis of "alpha" is dictated first and foremost by the female drives and desires. Especially the more good looking and less intelligent females. The goal of the alpha is to appease and study these drives and desires, in fact this is almost all that is talked about. What other unique or important drives the male has shall be ignored for the time being, in order to appease more vagina. For without the vagina everything comes falling down, and you will have no basis for your masculinity.

As long as the dogma "I'm alpha bro!" can be uttered, you are forever alpha! Believe!

 

 

Edited by Keizo, 24 June 2014 - 06:03 PM.

[TheFountain]

Why the FUCK was my thread moved? How is this more an economical discussion than a FUCKING philosophical one? One person requests a move and it moves? How the FUCK is that democracy! So move it to where nobody can barely see it!!!!???!!??!!???? 

[Arjuna]

It isn't limited to masculinity and violence, it can be anything.

 

It is being charismatic and free to spontaneously act any way you want, because you aren't limited by the restrictions of others or by fear of criticism.  

 

Who gets to decide? Everyone gets to decide.

 

How do you know if you are alpha? Do you reek of insecurity? Are you transparent to everyone yet still know nothing about yourself?  Are you running away from yourself?

 

 

[Brafarality]

^^^ Non-sense. I see plenty of young, pretty females with "beta" types. There is no specific linear order to this phenomenon. 

 

I think we all need to stop acting like we know what the fuck we are talking about. All I know is me. And I am Alpha! 

 

Whatever someone else is is up to them. 

You know "All I know is me and I am Alpha" would make a great T-shirt! Just wanted to mention.

[corb]

A common and popular definition by pick up artists and similar: Whoever fornicates the most with promiscuous women.

 

 

 

If we go by the natural definition just having sex is not enough, you have to make babies.

It's about who spreads his genes the most.

I was thinking for a while about it and I think it really is as simple as that.

Breed with a lot of women, have a lot of kids. You've basically done what nature intended.

 

I do understand why one would opt not to procreate though. Alimony and child support nowadays are brutal.

[Arjuna]

Edited away. Too much time spent on the internet.

 

Edited by Arjuna, 15 July 2014 - 11:27 PM.