Practical Consequences of Variety

This post is a direct follow up to Core Stability and Meme Selection.

In this post, I will further discuss consequences of Variety and give you some of its many practical consequences. These are all usable in field but no in the sense that they may help you get this one particular girl there and now, but because ultimately, by using the meme acquisition algorithm, you will have a complete understanding for the Variety perspective.


The Principles of Choice and Respect
The obvious direct consequence of the principle of choice (PoC) is that you should always actively make her choose. Of course, in order to make her choose, you have to give her the opportunity to choose. There are some escalation steps that require obvious choices: will she comply or defy? The following are the most obvious steps and provide the playground for you to experiment:

1. On the approach - you want to talk to her - will she respond or not?
2. While indirectly sharing meme maps - you want to get to know her - does she want to share time?
3. While kino pinging - you want mutual kino - will she reciprocate or not?
4. Extraction - you want to go home with her - does she want the same?
5. Meeting for a day 2 - you want to see her again - does she want to see you again?
6. Sex - you want to sleep with her - does she want to sleep with you?
   

Before moving on, I want to point out an important fact: you don't guess what she wants or not. You give appropriate signals of interest - opening, talking, kinoing, extracting, calling/texting, and undressing, respectively - and let her respond as she wants. The different lies in what you do if she defies: you don't plow, you don't try to "convince" her that she should be doing it.

If doesn't want to, then you are standing in front of a girl that doesn't want the same thing as you. By the principle of respect (PoR), you now have an incompatibility. Respect means not dropping your beliefs and desires for hers. Move on.

If she hesitates, well, it could be because of two things: either she doesn't want to, or you're escalating too fast. The question you need to ask yourself is this: is she attracted to me or not? If so, how attracted is she? Is this just the wrong place or time, or the wrong emotional state? There's room for escalation at another, more appropriate place and time. But if she doesn't feel the same way towards you as you do, then again, you are incompatible. Move on. The key here lies in being honest to yourself about your beliefs regarding her desires. If you are unsure, there are plenty of subtle ways to find out.

I will give you practical examples of all situations.

If you approach a girl and she isn't responding to whatever you have to say, then move on. If she is boring, well, it means you find her boring. Move on. By PoR, you have the power to exert your own choice whenever someone doesn't meet your criteria, so use it!

If you tell her something and she doesn't seem to be interested, it's not because of whatever you are saying. It's because of what little impression she has of you. There is a time and place for analyzing why you didn't make such a good impression, and that is called tomorrow. For now, the fact of the matter is, she doesn't find you interesting. She has made her choice. Move on. If she regrets it, she will give you proximity later, or even reopen you. But that has nothing to do with why you are moving on. You are moving on because you want girls that want you, and she has therefore disqualified herself. Really, you have to believe it.

If you are kinoing her and she doesn't kino back, it may not be hesitation but passive-submissiveness. While kino reciprocation clearly means she is attracted, lack of it doesn't imply anything at all. It could be because she is nervous or shy. Or because she has her ex boyfriend there. Or because she would rather save those bits for later. What you should do instead, is to find out whether she is responsive at all - test for other investments: engage her in conversation, see how much she naturally invests socially (don't force it with obvious hoops). Try to move or isolate her. Does she comply now? If not, move on.

Extraction. Saying "do you want to have sex with me?" would certainly force her to choose, but it is uncalibrated because it signals more than your attraction for her: it also signals that you aren't really interested in her at all, only to have sex with her. Assuming you could imagine seeing her again, you would be giving her the wrong impression. Instead, ask her this very simple question: "Do you want to go back to my place?". If she says no, then she doesn't want to have sex tonight. Again, it may simply be too early. If she says yes, well, you know the rest. If she hesitates, it could be because of a sense of guilt leaving her friends, or because she doesn't really want to be doesn't want you to think she's not attracted, or because she's unsure what you will think of her. Here comes an important difference in perspective: it is not your job to release her negative emotions, but it is your job to help her release those negative emotions. Let her female friend join you, who knows how things will end up. Tell her she could go home with you now or see you next week, but you would prefer both. As far as ASD is concerned, the concept is the same as used by the ASD-killer: convey that you are sexually non-judgmental, preferably indirectly, but if it's not enough (because she is hesitating due to ASD), then more or less directly. Don't be afraid to be genuine (but see my upcoming post about calibration for the difference between being genuine and uncalibrated).

Meeting for a day 2 is an interesting one, because the solution is so obvious. You could either call or text, it doesn't matter. Assuming you are texting, write one or two fluff messages to get in touch again, and then, at the end of your next message, write: "I want to see you again. What are you doing on Sunday?". Of course, any variation is fine: "next week", "this weekend", "Wednesday evening", or whatever is suitable. Whether she wants to see you again or not will be obvious by her answer. This is choice in a nutshell, because here she has all the time in the world to think about it. Should you write "kisses" or "hugs"? Although seemingly very trivial, the logic behind calibration versus genuine expression is quite complex and deserves a rigorous treatment (upcoming post).

And finally, sex. You could occupy every couch and chair with stuff to avoid making her sit there, but it wouldn't be giving her a choice would it? The logic is the following: sometimes girls have an unconscious desire to have sex with you, but they don't consciously manage to express it. So they may end up in your couch even though they want to fuck, creating a huge and unnecessary challenge to move them to your bed in what would signal an obvious attempt to have sex. How about this: Don't occupy chairs and couches, give her the choice to sit there. Lead her towards the bed, and if she's already sitting there (because you were in the bathroom or getting a glass of water), move towards her and say: "No not there. I want you here." And lead her to the bed. As for hesitation, it is your job to help her remove it, but not remove it for her. Last minute time bridges (what I've previously called "instant pair bonds", but this term is misleading) does a great job conveying that you want to see her again in a calibrated way.

These ideas are implemented in the following way.

Therefore, you must show some level of (calibrated) interest. Usually the approach itself will do. Disqualifiers of any kinds: negs, false time constraints, false disqualifiers, cannot be used unless you need to disarm an obstacle. The purpose of the interaction is to find out whether you naturally have rapport with her. Whether you use a direct or indirect style of approach doesn't matter. What matters is that you make her understand that you are interesting in her (and this can be done in subtle ways if you want), and already then comes choice. Does she want to know more about you or not? If not, then leave. Otherwise, it's time to have fun together. Go into the emotional perspective of existential duality, be in the moment (mindfulness), and have fun together. The purpose of the interaction is to provide an indirect way for you to display your meme map to her, and for her to display hers to you. Her choice of getting to know you more or not lies in how responsive she will be to you, because that is the signature of attraction.

Don't be afraid to escalate. If you go for a kiss and she defies, then she simply isn't attracted to you. Move on. If she kisses you, then she has "made" the choice to get to know you more. Use this opportunity for meme sharing, resulting in more rapport. Meme sharing doesn't mean you have to directly explain your memes. They are diffused through your interpretations, your reactions, your behavior. Don't focus on getting that part right: be in the moment, obtain complete mindfulness.

Now to more general rules.


No Plowing
PoC implies that you can never plow, because plowing means always trying to fight through her unresponsiveness until you she becomes responsive. Of course, a person living up to the core five may still plow on rare occasions, namely those where he is experimenting or just messing around for the sake of fun. But this requires that the core five are already installed into his core. When you are trying to install the core five, there is no excuse for plowing: it will only divert you from discovering the core five, and hence, from improving. PUAs despise chodes for plowing in neediness, but they do exactly the same thing. The reason, they say, is that they know how the game is played and they only plow because they are practicing. Only, the practicing never ends, and neither does the plowing. And so their keep doing the same things as the people they are trying to illuminate. But how about we make a decision to be the person who always has self respect (in the sense previously defined), and from now on, become that person? Why all the waiting? Are you that afraid of the sacrifices you have to make to become that person?

Mission:
Brush kino within the first minute of approaching.

If you've been talking to a girl for more than 5 minutes (by the end of the next song they are playing) and have no reciprocated kino, try to move her. Eject if it doesn't work.

At any time, if you sense she's not that into you, and it makes you feel less alpha, you could do one of two things: either give her the choice, or simply eject. To make her choose say "I'm wondering about something...are you happy right now?" The only way you'll stay is if she's in a bad state, that is because of something you can't control, and she changes state to a more positive. You eject with "I want to find my friends now. Have fun tonight."

If you try to kiss and it doesn't work, look at her and say: "we'll try one more time" and go for it again. If it doesn't work, eject. Don't be rude, don't say anything challenging. Just eject with "okay, bye". And back to mindfulness; no analyzing now.

For the next 6 months, don't take any phone number (or anything), only give yours. Tell them you want to see them again and would be happy if they called or texted (they will text first). No exceptions to this rule. Make her choose.



Perfect Sequence Hypothesis
Another perspective some outer game guys hold is the following: for every girl, there is a sequence of actions that will bring her in bed with you. Let us call this the perfect sequence hypothesis (PSH). Typically, PSH results in the ideal of perfect game: approach N girls, close all of them. This perspective has dramatic consequences: since girls can respond to different things, it means that you have to be careful when attracting and escalating. In particular, you should avoid doing "risky" things: conveying memes that might possibly contradict hers, or showing interest too early. This strongly contradicts both the principle of choice and respect: choice because you never actively let her choose you or not when you are trying to do anything you can to make her choose (it's the exact opposite), respect because you are never showing her your own principles, you are only playing by her rules. Whether PSH is true or not is irrelevant. Whether the sequence is even real time computable, which would be the interesting question if you believe PSH to be true, is also irrelevant. What is relevant is that the sequence of actions you take do not have the purpose of achieving a result with her, they have the purpose of finding out whether the two of you are compatible in terms of attraction, connection, sexually, and usually later, memetically.

Mission: If a girl says something that you disagree with, say it. Don't be afraid to mention what you find interesting or important. They may not be great topics of conversation for the bar, but throwing in small indications of which memes you have (beliefs, opinions, principles, perspectives) will help her choose you based on who you are. And don't overdo it - do it when there's an opportunity, when your current conversation allows for such throw ins. Don't be afraid to express yourself.


Principle of Unreactiveness
Here is a principle that many PUAs adhere to: never react more to the girl than she reacts to you. (Some even have the stronger principle "never react to girls".) I call this the principle of unreactiveness. The idea behind it is that girls are attracted to unreactive guys, and so by being unreactive, you hence become attractive.

The principle of respect directly contradicts this: whenever you aren't satisfied with someone's behavior, that someone is doing something that conflicts with your principles, and you should show it to them to give them the opportunity to show you respect. It could come from a shit test, but whether she is doing it consciously or not doesn't affect the issue here: whenever you are unsatisfied with something that someone else has caused, and you know this could repeat itself, it is your job to help them avoid this dissatisfaction by explaining what you don't like. You show a principle, they reciprocate respect. And of course, it's mutual.

The reason why many adhere to the principle of unreactiveness is because of a misunderstanding: neediness is unattractive, reactiveness is not necessarily. You aren't needy just because you are reacting, it depends on how you are reacting. PoR provides a natural way of reacting with both self respect and respect for others. Indeed, there is something very wrong about putting effort into behaving as if one didn't put effort into it.

Many PUGs claim that you get more shit tests the better you become. This is true when you do PU from an "arrogant unaffected uninterested frame" or from a "cool guy doing lots of cool things frame". The more annoyingly interesting you are, the more she will annoy you. Using this third paradigm, I promise you that you will barely get any shit tests, conscious or unconscious. Yes, there will be a lot of playful teasing, but it's from an obvious "I am attracted to you, I am having so much fun with you" frame. It's mutual. Reciprocate the fun and together you will have a great time with lots of fun. Throw shit at her and she will become chocked, disappointed, uncomfortable, and lose attraction.

Mission: Whenever you get a shit test, react in whatever way you feel about it.

If she asks whether you want to buy her a drink, ask her why she wants you to do it? If she gives a shitty explanation, ask her if she's playing games with you (but in a light and fun tone, there nothing to get upset over!).

If she tells you to wait for her while she goes to the bathroom, tell her you'll wait if she really wants you to. It's important to say it with the right smile and tone, the frame is supposed to be: "I'll wait if you really like me".

If she brings up her boyfriend, say: "do you really want to be talking about him right now?". If she says yes, tell her it's better be a fun story because you're not interested in men.

These examples all came up as I was creating typical situations relevant to unreactiveness. I wrote them all without pausing: it was the first thing I wanted to say as I was imagining the situation. With the right perspectives, you don't need to figure out what to say because your emotions will speak for you. With the right mood and perspectives on calibration (a later issue), you will always know how to say it right.


One-Itis and Orbiters
One itis is a gay emotion that reveals a weak core. One itis, by definition, means that you are trying to get back someone that doesn't want you. So that someone has made the choice to not be with you, and you are not definitely not embracing her choice, directly contradicting the principle of choice. This holds true for any girl that knows you want her but doesn't want you.

An orbiter is a boy that holds a friendship with a girl in the hope of having sex with her one day. Whether she knows about it or not constitutes two different cases: if she knows about it, then this is the one itis case above. If she doesn't know about it, then you aren't actively giving her any choice. In both cases, you are contradicting the principle of choice.

If it sounds impossible to avoid experiencing one itis with someone you truly love, it is only because you cannot even conceive of a person bearing the core five. Of course, being sad, feeling lonely, and missing someone are natural feelings that we must allow ourselves to experience. But those feelings are for you, and only you. One itis goes one step further, making those feelings about someone else: it's the desire to have something back, as opposed to the sadness of losing something and moving on.

Mission: If your LTR leaves you and you miss her, let her know you don't want any contact with her, and remove her number. Remove any contact information you have about her. Don't make any attempts at calling her, don't keep yourself updating about her life. Erase. Completely. If you see her out, feel free to talk to her for a while, but don't try to get anywhere. Have fun with other people. Focus your mind on the rest of the world, where there is opportunity. She belongs to the past now.


Abundance Mentality
Abundance mentality is the perspective that there are so many girls (and more generality, of almost anything you could want) that it's just dumb to focus on one particular if she doesn't want you.

This may sound like the principle of choice, but PoC is actually more general than abundance mentality: PoC states that you want girls to choose you based on who you are. If they choose not to be with you, that is a good thing because you only want girls that really want you. Abundance mentality states the same thing, but relies on an environment where there are many girls. In a place where there are only warpigs or few girls, abundance mentality breaks down because it relies on an external fact of the world.

The Principle of choice is completely internal, and hence more idealized (but at least equally pragmatic of course). Therefore abundance mentality can be used as a helper meme to reach a conviction of PoC.

Mission: When you are talking to a girl that is unresponsive, go find someone else (or a group) to talk to (there's an abundance). With the principle of choice, you could do either that or simply stop talking to her and, without moving, start looking for fun elsewhere. This must be done without regard to her reactions: you can't pretend to not be interested, you simply have to not care about her anymore.


Mutuality
By PoR, you treat others as they want to be treated, and you expect the same from them. Given that some situations are boring for all of us, we can give some missions.

Mission: When you are 1-on-1 with a girl and she pulls up her phone to text or call someone, let her know (calibrate how: jokingly, indirectly, directly) you think it's disrespectful and you're not having fun.

If she's talking to someone else while you're waiting for her to finish, let her know you're bored and waiting for her to finish.

If she flakes, and you're disappointed, do show it. If she flakes again and you become irritated, show it. If she doesn't understand, or pretends like she doesn't understand, ask her to call you if and when she understands. Then next her.

Memetics: Core Stability and Meme Selection

This post is a follow up to a series of memetical post, the previous one being The Core Five Perspectives. They should be read in the appropriate order; a sorted list of all the posts are available in my blog.

Before I go into the fifth perspective, Core Stability, I need to generalize the principle of choice and respect into a full blown perspective: Variety Endorsement. This perspective will replace the more specific principles in the following way.



Variety Endorsement

We are all different. We are born different, with different sets of genes. We learn different skills, shape different memories, and acquire different set of beliefs, opinions, passions, ambitions and dreams. In other words, we all have a unique set of genes and memes which, presumably, are the only two relevant forces that act on our will.

Unlike our genes, which are only transmitted vertically (from parents to children), our memes are transmitted in every possible way - between friends, and acquaintances; by celebrities through tv, radio, by authors through books, by parents to children. The problem is that memes, just like genes, spread not because we necessarily want them to, but because of a simple result of statistics: whatever is more likely to spread, will spread.

We try to spread our memes to people by convincing them of our beliefs, opinions, and perspectives not because we necessarily feel good about it. We certainly find it tempting to "enlighten" people with that which we are convinced of, but we keep trying even when it becomes frustrating to us. It is this frustration that defines the borderline between the memes interest in spreading and your well being, because you are no longer doing what is good for you, you are instead doing what is good for your memes.

If we are to take control of our lives and consciousness, we must stop trying to convince others when it no longer gives us any good. We must think about our own well being, and embrace the fact that we all are memetically different. Only then can we truly appreciate what it means to be an individual, a distinct consciousness, and break free from the slavery of our memes.

We must choose our friends based on their set of memes, not on our hope to "convert" them into our perspectives. We must choose girls based on their set of memes (our emotions will do the genetical matching through the triggering of attraction). This is what variety implies: that we are all different, and we should look for both the similarities and differences we appreciate in others. Whatever it is we may be able to offer others, is up to them to decide. Whatever they have to offer us, is for us to decide. Some may not like us for our perspectives, and this is a good thing. Frustration is the only thing we gain by not accepting this fact. Here's another way to put it (that I personally don't like but may help some of you): the prize we pay for being free of our memes control over us is letting others decide how close to us they want to be, based on whatever criteria they have. Instead, we will focus on our own decision making with regard to other people. It is never about what we can get, it is about what we want. This is the principle of choice.

If we treat others like we would like to be treated (the golden rule), we are assuming that others are, or should be, like us, which violates variety endorsement. By showing others what we value, and by finding out what they value, we can treat others like they want to be treated. Whenever this is impossible because differences in perspectives imply different principles (conscious rules for behavior), we must accept these differences and find theequilibrium point. This could mean that we only interact with certain people in a specific context (where our principles will not collide), such as drinking buddies, coworkers, FBs, or nothing at all. This is the principle of respect.

Core Stability

As pointed out earlier, your core memes have to match each other. Inconsistencies disrupt the stream of consciousness, because it causes confusion. It makes us wonder what choices to make in situation that would otherwise be trivial? Confusion arises because of an internal conflict of will: some memes emotionally pull you in one direction, others in another. The less suchinconsistencies, the less internal conflicts, the less confusion. We become more decisive, and feel more complete.

The immediate implication of this realization is that you can't squish every meme out there into your brain. Guys that are into self development are especially open minded when it comes to new ideas, making them prone to try out pretty much any meme out there. Critical thinking is low or non-existent, requirements for truth and even usability are preferably but anything will do in the hope of achieving something. With this point of view, you become memetically desperate.

There are many ways in which you could fail to have a solid core: you could have a large pool of memes, of which none are really core memes, because you lack certainty/conviction. Or you could have a large pool of disconnected memes, giving plenty of small insights here and there, but no perspective. Or you could have lots of core inconsistencies: things just don't fit together, although you are trying really hard to make them fit, hence misunderstanding at least one of the perspectives. These three problems - disconnectedness and inconsistency - occur because of a lack of efficient meme acquisition mechanism. By being memetically desperate, we are susceptible to the latter two problems: connectedness and consistency.

What happens is that you end up having two broken perspectives rather than one solid whole. The first is worth less than a blank slate, whereas the second is the ideal. Why then, do so many guys end up with the broken parts? As mentioned, memetically desperate people want to absorb as many good memes as possible. The problem arises when there is an additional meme: the belief that memes cannot do any harm. It's strange to provide arguments for why memes can harm you in, since there isn't any reason to believe that they wouldn't, considering the facts that memes are indifferent about your well being and we all agree they have the power to change the way we think.

Just like a random gene, or a random computer program, doesn't necessarily do any good to it's host, neither to the memes. We avoid installing unknown software on our computers because we have been taught that there is harmful software. But it is really something they had to learn; it just doesn't come automatically. The analogy is obvious: most of us, not being meme experts, do not understand the potential danger some memes have.

Unfortunately, the problems don't end here. The "memes can't harm" belief is not one people hold with great certainty. They don't keep thinking "memes can't harm, so I'll try them all". They just never think about it that way in the first place. New memes are introduced, and there is no resistance - they are inhaled like air. The explanation is probably this simple: as children, we can't afford any resistance, because we have to learn, and we have to learn really fast. Given that our parents (for the vast majority of the time) mean us well, the optimal (gene) strategy is to have no memetic defence at all. As we grow up, we become somewhat more memetically stable (because of an inherent need for some level of consistency), but some of us aren't satisfied with their memetic core. Typically, this is because society - their parents, teachers, siblings, upbringing - failed to provide them with a solid core foundation. So they need to do what children did a long time ago: install a memetic core, only this time they'll have to do it themselves. This is the essence of it: realizing you don't have a solid core makes you memetically desperate. Not having a solid core also makes you memetically unstable, because there are no memeplexes that stabilize incoming memes. You absorb anything, and change in any direction. The memes are in effect controlling you.

The Meme Sceptic Meme

The solution is to install the "meme sceptic meme", which states the following:

"Whenever you encounter a meme, carefully consider the effects this meme will have on you based on your current memetic core. Assume that a new meme could be harmful until proven otherwise. That they spread fast, meaning that many people have it, is no proof of being it being a "nice" meme. It only means that the meme is good at replicating itself."

The sceptic meme adds a control mechanism to the process of acquiring new memes: there is both selection, where the meme sceptic meme is used to examine and screen new memes, and installation, where the memes get properly installed for efficient use (so they are triggered whenever needed). Together, these two processes shape the meme acquisition algorithm: there is a concurrent development of both meme selection and installation.

The Meme Acquisition Algorithm

This Meme Aquisition Algorithm lays the foundation for learning the core five perspectives.

How do you install new memes efficiently? The answer lies in exploiting the same mechanisms as the memes you to spread themselves to you. In effect, it is about applying my escalation model to the theory of memetics.

Cognitive dissonance is one of the most fascinating and strongest mechanisms at increasing our compliance towards things. By considering the memes as sargers and you as the target in the escalation model, we have an interesting analogy: the memes are trying to make you more attracted to them, and whenever you invest in them it rationalizes into more compliance for the memes. In a world of information technology, where ideas are given, patented, and sold, the memes are in fierce competition for survival. Most of them died a long time ago, some evolved and fused into larger memeplexes and spread to the world through speech, text, images, audio, video, rituals, and war. The more we invest in them, the better they survive inside our brains.

You invest in your memes by thinking about them. The more you analyze them, the more you will feel them, the more convicted you will become.

An ever better way is to spread and discuss them with others. The more you are mentioning your memes to others, bringing it into discussion, the more invested you become in your memes.

This is how we consciously create more compliance for our memes, which is my definition of meme installation. But how do we become attracted to memes in the first place?

First, some necessary conditions are required: the meme must be logically consistent with your memetic core, since core memes hold personal value and conviction. In fact, this is best understood as various degrees of personal value:

Low: you understand the meme logically
Moderate: you can see how the meme fits or doesn't fit with your core
High: you have emotional attachment to the meme

Take the meme "most girls want guys to approach them". At a logical level, you understand what the meme means: it states that a majority of girls, presumably in bars and clubs, want to be approached.

On a moderate level, you can see how this fits with your current set of beliefs. Combined with the already installed meme "girls want to have sex as much as guys" would give a very different conclusion from the installed "girls are bitchy to guys they don't know". The expression the memes give - its logical/emotional conclusion - depends on your already installed set of beliefs. In other words, memes interact in memeplexes, and their phenotype is dependent on this interaction.

On a high level, you emotionally feel the meme. It's not just "most girls want guys to approach them". It's "Of course! I knew it already, most girls want guys to approach them, that's why they usually (insert any explanation based on previous experiences)".

Note that this algorithm is not the natural one people use: people, at least those who do hold interesting beliefs, are naturally convinced of some things without even realizing that they may in fact contradict other beliefs they hold. This is because they directly jump from "low" to "high" without passing the "moderate" filter: the flaw is to think that what sounds good is good (the meme desperate meme).

By using the meme sceptic meme, we have three things to check: is the meme self consistent (low), is it consistent with your meme core (moderate), does it provide you (not necessarily itself) with any benefit (moderate)?

The last check leads us to the concept of usefulness. People usually absorb memes depending on one criteria only: does this meme make me feel good right now? This is why retarded ideas like "just be yourself, don't change" propagate better than more productive ideas like "be your best self": the first one is easier to understand, it involves less work, and hence less pain. It pretty much says "stay in your comfort zone, right where you are" which indeed feels nice. We are tempted to look for easy, quick "feel good" fixes. These memes make you feel better now, but offer you nothing in the long run.

The meme sceptic meme provides a way of detecting useless and destructive memes; after screening them out, only the useful ones remain. The huge benefit we receive in the process of eliminating shitty memes is that once a memes has passed our sceptical tests, it becomes truly solid. I take the meme sceptic meme to an extreme, and it only benefits me: my core memes aren't threatened whenever someone comes up with another meme that sounds good, because I have already thought about it, figured out its flaws or inconsistencies (within my own core of course), and rejected it (otherwise I would already have installed it). The practical consequence is that memes get further divided into two categories: really good ones, and really crappy ones. The idea is a binary view on meme conviction: install it into my core, or throw it out. There is no middle way (but there is a switch of perspective as specified by Existential Dualism). Conviction, or rejection. I am left with one solid core instead of fragments from various different memeplexes that don't make any sense together. When memes don't make sense together, they obviously don't bring much usefulness, and will many times bring in more problems than they solve.

In a world of information, we are constantly bombarded with new memes. The core stability perspective not only protects you from harmful memes, it also creates a further segregation of memes, namely into the ones that will be inside your head and those who will never be. This creates a stronger conviction towards your own core.

If you have understood everything so far, I am now ready to synthesize this into the installation algorithm. Let us say you encounter a new meme X.

1. Get a logical understanding for X (by logically interpreting it).
2. Associate X with your memetic core. How does X fit with the rest? Together with your core, what are the new implications?
3. Identify past experiences you've had in which X may have been relevant.
4. Visualize how you behave with X in hypothetical (but common) situations.
5. Identify live situations in which X is relevant (e.g. in the field). Analyze the practical consequences of X: How did it affect your emotions? And consequently, your behavior? If X is a perspective: try out some of the principles implied by the perspective.
   
6. Experiment for a while: repeat step 5.
   
7. Start investing in X (thinking, spreading, discussing) to increase your own conviction.
8. Finally, having X nicely installed, relax and enjoy! X is now naturalized into your core.
   

Where does the meme sceptic meme come into play? I have omitted it from the installation algorithm above. The screening process comes in during each step. Compare with the above, and add the following intuitive rejection principle:

1. Reject X if self inconsistent.
2. Reject X if it's inconsistent with your own core or if it would become destructive.
   
3. Reject X if it has been destructive and there's no reason to believe it would do better now (it can only do better if your core has changed).
4. Reject X if you can't see yourself being congruent with X. If you say "no that's not me", then this meme is not for you.
5. Reject X if, after a repeated number of experiences, this meme does you no good.
6. Repeated tests on X according to step 5.
   
7. The meme has now been accepted. The meme sceptic meme is now turned off.
8. See above.
   

In other words, step 1-6 are both installation and control measures, where the meme is rejected when it doesn't do what it's supposed to do (in the sense discussed above). Step 7 is about strenghtening the meme (fully installing it). Step 8 is about letting go of your conscious behaviors surrounding the meme: get used to it being a natural part of you.

Reprogramming yourself

The memes installation I am further going to address is, of course, that of the core five perspectives. The good news is that core stability is a meme about how to install (and reject) other memes: so you don't practice to learn it: you just do it, and after practicing on installing the other core four, this one will automatically have been installed.

Look at the memetic acquisition algorithm above. I have already addressed the content (logical structure) of each meme. This is step 1.

The second step is for you to relate it to yourself. The core five are consistent and relate to each other in a very natural way. If you have memes that conflict with them, throw them out now. If you don't wish to do that, then you will have to realize that the core five will do you no good (not now at least) and stop reading my posts.

The third step is to identity past experiences with each of the core five. Can you see situations in which you've thought about them, or felt them, even if only in the blink of an eye? Have there been situations in which you would have needed them?

The fourth step is to imagine various scenarios. Take your sticking points. Got AA? Got problems escalating? Got problems extracting? I am going to guess that whatever sticking point you have, it comes down to fear on some level. Ninety nine percent of all sticking points do. How does the core five change your pain and pleasure center? What are the emotional implications of the core five in various situations? What usefulness do they bring you?

Step five is about trying out the principles that are implied by the core five. These are obvious to anyone who already has installed the core five, or that has a great capacity for deductive thinking. I will help you with the latter by stating the general principles implied: these are the practical consequences of the core five. I will give you these practical consequences in my next post(s). I want to warn you however, that understanding special cases like those I will give you will not automatically give you an understanding for the larger perspectives themselves. After all, the point is that you should understand them well enough to arrive at the proper conclusions yourself. The principles are there because we people have an easier time understanding general things by starting with simpler special cases. Ultimately, you are responsible for properly assimilating the core five.

The sixth step is simply a repetition of the above, until you feel comfortable with the new meme.

Step 7. Finally, start spreading the word! By Variety, you can't spread your memes in an attempt to convince others of your core. We don't serve our memes, they serve us. Memes exploit our rationalization and hence would want us to invest. We generally avoid spreading memes because it's only frustrating to try to change others. However, in this case, where we have been sceptical and finally want to absorb a new meme, it helps us to spread it because it creates stronger personal value and conviction. It is for our benefit, not the meme's.

And by the logic above, when the meme is installed (we have personal value and conviction), we drop whatever isn't in our own interest, which by Variety, means we don't try to spread it for the sake of spreading anymore.

In my next post, I will describe go into some very specific details on the fifth step of the meme acquisition algorithm above by giving you concrete examples of how to implement the core five. Because they are deeply interconnected, I will both give you examples in which one of the perspectives is separated from the rest, but also examples that rely on combining them.


Any comments welcome.