Samuel Kio

@Marshiipup @moosewithjob @constans I need to get off this app bro 😂 Evolution is nature. That's my fucking point. Humans evolving is not "fighting against nature". Neither is creating tools, or structures, or any of that. They are literally the byproduct of our complicated brains and tribal instincts.

@SamuelKio_ @moosewithjob @constans Admitting you don't believe in evolution isn't the gotcha you think it is man

This is clinical depression/dysthymia. Almost textbook.

@DancingEddie_ Health is wealth. Health is also power, same as money. If you have enormous influence, the best way to multiply your influence is to make it last longer.

it’s a bit ominous as a younger guy that every single rich dude > makes hundreds of millions of dollars > immediately becomes a health fanatic is the falloff after 35 that bad?

@ubiquitousnewt C'mon are we even trying anymore? It's physically impossible for everyone to be rich. Being rich is a relative statement. If everyone is rich, nobody is rich. Everyone can have a healthy amount of fat, muscle, and have healthy skin. These are objective metrics.

The “just control your weight, take care of your skin and grow your hair long” advice is basically the female version of “just be rich bro”. It states the ideal accurately, but pretends the path to it is simple and equally accessible when it’s heavily gated by genetics, ethnicity, diminishing returns, and the sheer investment required to move even half a point once you’re past a certain baseline.

@Marshiipup @moosewithjob @constans "Humans have been going against nature for thousands of years" "Humans evolved to..."

@SamuelKio_ @moosewithjob @constans Humans have been going against nature for thousands of years. We as a species only survived by going against nature and both 1. Starting communities and 2. Eating cooked meat. Hell, humans evolved to give birth way earlier than other mammals cuz our head is too big for the canal

@aleroi @Noahpinion Holy reading comprehension. That's literally my point. Respect doesn't equal "morally good". Respect equals "I recognize the strategic design that went into this".

@SamuelKio_ @Noahpinion I have zero respect for brutalist architecture precisely because we know that the environment shapes the mind. Brutalist architecture is psychological violence.

The idea that progress is downstream of architecture is astrology for men

@LouiseS1996 @constans Being "bored with nearly everything in life" is not sad?That's what you characterized as "acknowledging the irrelevance of existence".

@SamuelKio_ @constans It's not sad where did you get that idea

@HistoryBoomer If right-wingers put literally any effort into dividing the left they would shatter overnight. If a couple of college students could cause a multi-million dollar media firestorm with some pieces of paper reading "It's Okay to be White", so can you.

I'd love to be the CIA guy in charge of dividing the left. Collect a hefty paycheck and report success every week without ever having to do any work!

@moosewithjob @constans Trying to "overcome" biological nature is the single worst idea ever generated by modernity. Your nature is who you are, whether you like it or not. Suppressing it is not liberation, it is suicide. Social constructionist brainrot is a mind virus.

@SamuelKio_ @constans i'm not sure if you've been made aware, but circa 4000BCE we made this little thing called "civilization" that kind of preludes humans from categorizing their desires solely by their basic mammalian instincts

@moosewithjob @constans My point is mammals have a deep biological need, and ESPECIALLY social need in the current climate, to have children. Most people are lucky to have a single close non-familial relationship. Living without intimate relationships is not healthy.

@SamuelKio_ @constans yeah just cure your potential mental illness by forcing yourself to raise a child, literally nothing has ever gone wrong and nobody has ever been harmed from this line of thinking!

@Telos_of_War @wesyang Thank you my friend. It's very foreign to me as well. That's probably why I don't have many friends. lol Feel free to dm or switch to another platform btw, twitter threads aren't the best place to have a conversation.

@SamuelKio_ @wesyang Hmm almost an intuitive survival mechanism rather than an abstraction of thought. It appears to be a decision cycle but is really not. I'm not sure I can comprehend that thought process, it seems "alien". However I have observed it thousands of times. Your thesis is robust.🤷

This is an important point and a terrifying one, showing how an entire population could be incrementally manipulated into fervent support of ideas that most would have found abhorrent a decade prior to the process of ideological reconditioning

@Telos_of_War @wesyang Sharp point, yes. Their one axiom is "whatever makes me friends and doesn't get me yelled at". That is literally the only thing they understand. Glad you enjoy the book my friend, I'm updating the Oversocialization section in a bit since I missed a few important points.

@SamuelKio_ @wesyang But to pick a fad position still requires a decision cycle. They have to determine that the position they are picking is largely within the Venn circle they are aiming for in their quest for social status? In other words they have an axiomatic choice structure.

@ubiquitousnewt @von_dienstmann girl what 😂 Randomness = "no good advice"? You should pick up poker. After you're done shadowboxing.

@von_dienstmann @SamuelKio_ I don't think there is much good dating advice becaue so much advice is predicated on factors we don't have much control over.

I agree with the article on what the actual female ideal looks like for men. Low BMI, waist to hip ratio, curves, neotenous features, healthy skin, etc. But I think it underplays a few things, keeps turning probabilistic tendencies into rigid rules and understates genetic constraints. Also I think the author pushes the notion that highly curated beauty is the same thing as stable pair bonding success. It is not. First, reaching a more extreme waist-to-hip ratio is heavily influenced by genetics and skeletal structure, with significant ethnic and individual variation among women in how easily it can be achieved. It’s a much steeper climb for some ethnicities than others. Improvement becomes difficult after a certain point, and the effort required to become noticeably more attractive varies a great deal from woman to woman. Moving meaningfully up the attractiveness hierarchy is probably difficult without major investment, and even then the returns will vary. If you manage it, personality is still critical for attracting and keeping higher quality relationships, and core temperament is much less malleable than people like to pretend. Even when women go all in on surgery, extreme dieting, and other costly interventions to chase the ideal, it still does not reliably deliver stable high quality relationships. Reality television is full of examples. Second, while the physical ideal exists, both men and women make real trade offs in practice. Men still prioritise looks but will trade off on other qualities, especially in long term relationships. The extreme doll like standard is real and logical as a preference when you understand the evolutionary underpinnings, but everyday men relax it more than the piece suggests. My own experience lines up. In my two LTRs, partners have consistently liked the same things. My eyes, hair and petite frame, even though my waist is not especially tiny. Interestingly, lesbians, and I have worked in bars and gay bars for ages, have also made similar comments about my face that the blokes did. This is not unique or extraordinary. People often use flattering shorthand when describing women they find cute or feminine. Amusing. But still, better to be the Aldi version of an idol than unnoticed altogether. If different men, and even lesbians, keep converging on similar readings of my face and frame, then they are probably picking up on a real and recurring phenotype. That does not mean I, or any other woman, am literally comparable to some idealised feminine archetype, obviously, but it does suggest a recognisable feminine type that lands similarly across observers. This is useful for me because in the past I could sketch out what potential love interests were responding to. And currently, most importantly, what my other half favours. I can then endeavour to enhance and maintain these features. My looks (or lack thereof) must be doing some major heavy lifting because my personality is, by all accounts, most irregular indeed.

@Telos_of_War @wesyang You'd really like my book, it starts off as an epistemology text which would be right up your alley, then uses that as a jumping off point to branch out into psychology, sociology, and institutional analysis. Veritecture.org Happy to chat if you have questions.

@Telos_of_War @wesyang my b lol, thanks You're not really seeing the full picture. They dont have positions on anything. Literally. They do not conceive of an intellectual position as you would describe it. They have never heard of it. To them political positions are like wearing a football jersey

@Telos_of_War @wesyang wait are we still trolling now or are you fr

@SamuelKio_ @wesyang It's a puzzle to me anyway. How does one have a political position or a position on anything, without considering foundational axioms before deriving said position? It's the theory of mind of the thinker that I stumble with. Even if someone goes"with the flow" they still selected

@PearlteaRizzy What the fuck does a normie need to know about quantum field theory lmfao Normies are perpetually confused, anxious people dying for a modicum of understanding. Treat them like children. Explain to them what they see outside. They will love you. And they will get smarter.

@SamuelKio_ Last time they did that "normies" created a whole new age movement based on their misinterpretation of the quantum field theory. Many such cases, unfortunately.

Social media has basically normalized antisocial behavior, conspiratorial thinking, psychopathy, and impulsiveness that it's rapidly eroding the very fabric of society as well as democracy. We wouldn't be in this mess if the algorithm didn't favor ragebaits and echo chambers.

@ubiquitousnewt ok girly 😂

Again, hilariously oversimplified. Muscle gain in women is modest, highly variable, and approx 50% heritable in response. You can't squat your way to wider hips or a narrower ribcage, skeletal structure is fixed after puberty. Low WHR + curves is gated far more by genetics, pelvic width, and fat patterning than by "just build muscle." Twin studies put WHR heritability at 36-61% independent of BMI. Most women who train hard for years get some tone and a bit more shape; the "flawless Instagram hourglass" you see daily are the extreme genetic responders (plus often surgery, PEDs, filters, or pro-level everything).

@ubiquitousnewt what is this nothing statement lmfao. "you can become smarter within the confines of your genetic parameters. you cannot override your genetics blah blah blah" If you spent this much time shadowboxing in real life instead of twitter maybe things would be different for you.

@SamuelKio_ You can sculpt your physique within the confines your genetic parameters. You cannot override your genetics via weight lifting or any other kind of physical activity.

@PearlteaRizzy It's only junk because people with good ideas refuse to make them bite-sized. Smart people would rather cry all day about how social media is full of retards rather than learn to compress their ideas into a memetic format that normies can actually engage with.

@SamuelKio_ Information is like food. There's good food, and there's junk food. Same thing with information. There are websites with good useful information fact checked by multiple trusted sources. And then there's social media, which is an all you can eat buffet for junk information.