Hobbes FTW

Ezra, something about communication you have to understand is that delivery is often more important than content. You have your points, but how you deliver them may undermine its potential or even worse, its actual meaning.

I think if something needs to be pinned up for guys, it should be this: http://artofmanliness.com/

but he still does a better job at communicating it than you are

He aint nitpicking, you just can't seem to stick to a single point. Every time people challenge something you write, you change things a bit, you've change to the point you're either contradicting yourself or it seems that you don't really have a point to make anymore.


A man's self worth is judged by none other than the man himself. This is what you keep failing to understand.

Is constructive feedback only things that agree with you? A lot of people have been giving constructive feedback but you just get defensive. You want to see a blatant contradiction? Here it is


Then you go about telling people how they should be to thrive. Your message is inconsistent.

But you know what, lets put this aside, its pointless to argue on this since you're so damn defensive when the core of your argument is brought into question.

Lets just hear your opinion on this simple question:

Can a man's self-worth be judge by anyone else but himself?

Here you go




We have quoted you and done that many times in the past, did you learn anything? no. So why bother doing it? Your previous "series" (the one with the mind map) was better and had more potential.


If its immeasurable and subjective, what the hell are you doing defining it for people? What gives you the right to tell them what they "self worth" means to them?


Really? About thriving? If its about self-worth and that being so subjective, it basically invalidates everything you've been writing about.


I've met people who would fail your idea of "thriving" yet have an extreme amount of self worth and self esteem. Heck, I know a married old fart who goes around buayaing college chicks (rather successfully) for the fun of it. He has the fashion sense of an old chinaman, isn't rich and from the amount of cigarettes he smokes, I doubt he's even healthy Yet, he succeeds with women, women less than 1/2 his age.

Now, why is that?


As much as I agree with you, you have to realise that the aspect PUA's cover is an essential aspect in dating and relationships. Its not the whole thing, but important nonetheless.

This post has been edited by silverhawk: Jul 26 2009, 10:34 PM

There is the problem of something being so generalised it doesn't have any value.


The problem is you perpetrate this generalisation as though its something people should do/must do to succeed/thrive. There is truth to it, but as mentioned to you time and time again, you're putting the cart before the horse. Almost everyone knows that being healthy, being better groomed etc. will be better, but the problem is that such advice although true, is shallow, and it requires a much deeper understanding of core values before you truly understand what it means.

I'm going to make an assumption, but correct me if I'm wrong. You're still a student, and you haven't gone out in the working world to meet people at various levels of power. You're still stuck within the perspective of young students/young adults, the image of successful people are normally those on magazines; healthy, good looking and rich. Put that together with the social engagements around you and its easy to come to the misguided conclusion of what would qualities thriving person has.

Once you get out and start meeting people from all walks of life, you'll see how some really "attractive" people aren't "thriving" and how some people who just look so plain/average/below-average are actually doing damn well in life in almost all aspects. In your case, what you think is general truth may apply due to your personal experience, my personal experience however has a different generalisation.


I do believe that you trying to make it "nice" for people undermines the entire message. If you have something to say, something to share, something of value. SAY IT and STAND BY IT don't give a shit about what other people think of it, if they can't bloody accept what you say, boo hoo, go cry to mommy.

You can't help people who do not want help, but you can help those who actively seek for help. If you want to take up writing, you have to be very strong on your points, people will criticise your writing from all angles, and if you always try to pander to the myriad criticism, your message in itself starts to lose direction and value.


I don't think its even good to begin with.


Yes, which I am disagreeing with you now no? The crux of the issue lies within how you define "self worth". Like religious believes, you have to realise that its entirely personal. You can't tell another person what their self worth is, or even how to judge their own self worthiness. Its something that have to come to by themselves.

You can teach them how to find it, but you can't tell them what it should be or what it is.


Really?

Lets see what you said here:

Don't try to back paddle on the issue. This is exactly what you said and it does mean physical/mental/emotional health = self worth. This is further evidenced by the amount of topics you made on the same issue. If its not what you meant then perhaps you need to work on your communication skills.


You think using words like this makes you smarter or intimidates others? If you want to point out logical fallacies, please use the right ones. The misrepresentation of an opponent's arguments is the strawman fallacy. Non-sequitur is when the conclusion does not follow the premise.

You put your own words in your mouth mate. Not me.

+1