Theory Which path next for Whitepillers?

[Tabula Rasa]

Will you take the Path of Improvement? Or the Path of Stabilization?

"If the Blackpill teaches you how the world works, it is only natural the next step is to apply this knowledge in a practical approach to life. The Blackpill will tell you how things suck if you're ugly, but not how to move on with your life; how to live." - SergeantIncel



The above are two terms which were introduced by SergeantIncel in his threads about the Whitepill. The Paths are described as follows,

1. Path of stabilization: The person decides to reject society at large, focusing on minimizing pain and creating a stable life. Examples: LDARing, NEET life, acceptance of position in life, loss of hope and ideals, escape through drugs, alcohol, time-consuming hobbies, avoidance of "thinking about life" (injustice, pain, and suffering), etc.
2. Path of improvement: The person decides to accept (a flawed) society at large, focusing on improving their life wherever possible. Examples: Pursue economic or status gain, knowledge gain (either for curiosity or status/monetary gain), appearance gain (looksmaxing), social gain (social life), etc.

Let's further explore this idea of 'life paths' that Serge laid out. When an individual reaches a crucial point or juncture in life, they will oftentimes come at a crossroads where they will need to make an important life-altering decision. This crossroads analogy also marks an individual's transition from the Blackpill to the Whitepill.

Once an individual has reached the end of their Blackpill journey, they are faced with a choice to make regarding what they would do next. One could choose to not go any further past the Blackpill, essentially leaving them at a standstill. It's not THE wrong choice to make but it is certainly not an ideal one, and it definitely does not necessitate positive life outcomes or quality of life.

If an individual decides to move forward with the Blackpill knowledge they have attained, hence becoming Whitepilled, they will have to end up choosing a path for themself. This choice is an individual one, depending on the whims and circumstances of the individual, and no path is necessarily the right one. Someone may decide to reject society, focusing on minimising pain and creating a stable life for themself, hence choosing the Path of stabilisation, while another may choose to accept society and focus on improving different aspects of their life (Path of improvement). Sergeant notes that the paths are not mutually exclusive, (and one can always take what is useful and beneficial for them from each of the paths) but one would usually go more towards one path than the other.

This is a concept which I will term the Whitepill Crossroads and one which I argue should be the central, encompassing theory of the Whitepill.

This is an idea that has room for further exploration; for instance, are there sub-paths to the existing paths, or are there any other additional paths that we haven't accounted for?

Thanks for reading.

 

[Tabula Rasa]

Spoiler: Tags

@Myst @fartcannon420 @Puer Aeternus @SergeantAutist @John Cracovizk @Raskolnikov

 

[Tabula Rasa]

@SergeantAutist check this out
@zakuro

 

[SergeantAutist]

Will you take the Path of Improvement? Or the Path of Stabilization?

"If the Blackpill teaches you how the world works, it is only natural the next step is to apply this knowledge in a practical approach to life. The Blackpill will tell you how things suck if you're ugly, but not how to move on with your life; how to live." - SergeantIncel

View attachment 1902

The above are two terms which were introduced by SergeantIncel in his threads about the Whitepill. The Paths are described as follows,



Let's further explore this idea of 'life paths' that Serge laid out. When an individual reaches a crucial point or juncture in life, they will oftentimes come at a crossroads where they will need to make an important life-altering decision. This crossroads analogy also marks an individual's transition from the Blackpill to the Whitepill.

Once an individual has reached the end of their Blackpill journey, they are faced with a choice to make regarding what they would do next. One could choose to not go any further past the Blackpill, essentially leaving them at a standstill. It's not THE wrong choice to make but it is certainly not an ideal one, and it definitely does not necessitate positive life outcomes or quality of life.

If an individual decides to move forward with the Blackpill knowledge they have attained, hence becoming Whitepilled, they will have to end up choosing a path for themself. This choice is an individual one, depending on the whims and circumstances of the individual, and no path is necessarily the right one. Someone may decide to reject society, focusing on minimising pain and creating a stable life for themself, hence choosing the Path of stabilisation, while another may choose to accept society and focus on improving different aspects of their life (Path of improvement). Sergeant notes that the paths are not mutually exclusive, (and one can always take what is useful and beneficial for them from each of the paths) but one would usually go more towards one path than the other.

This is a concept which I will term the Whitepill Crossroads and one which I argue should be the central, encompassing theory of the Whitepill.

View attachment 1920

This is an idea that has room for further exploration; for instance, are there are sub-paths to the existing paths, or are there any other additional paths that we haven't accounted for?

Thanks for reading.

Inshallah, I will introduce the next path among whitepilledcels

 

[Tabula Rasa]

@Truest truecel

 

[Truest truecel]

I’ve been a neet for years so I suppose I’ve always been taking the path of stabilization this whole time. I feel like it’s too late to change courses now but I have no regrets. As for society at large, there are droves of men dropping out and adapting this same mindset too - simply because they no longer desire to participate in the ridiculously harsh and stressful rat race that life is only to receive a pitiful reward for their efforts.

It’s just not worth it anymore.

 

[Abhorrence]

path of evil

 

[menaquinone]

in Heider's balance theory, the bifurcation of the whitepill is a result of an unconscious effort to maintain cognitive consistency by modifying positive and negative biases (usually represented as a triadic relationship between subject, other and the object of perception). usually people that are adequately integrated have more robust support networks so that, even if they dislike society as a whole, they can avoid cognitive dissonance through appealing to their support network for satisfaction in other critical areas

this is probably something which could be implemented into theory, as there isn't any particular need to forfeit one's beliefs in order to attain general satisfaction. the path of stabilization offers security in minimizing pain, but isn't an absolute consequence of reaching a disaffected state of being

 

[Tabula Rasa]

(usually represented as a triadic relationship between subject, other and the object of perception).

Can you explain the elements of which make up the Whitepill?

 

[menaquinone]

Can you explain the elements of which make up the Whitepill?

subject: an individual who has accepted the blackpill and now seeks balance through the whitepill, either through stabilization or self-improvement. the subject seeks to resolve internal and external imbalances whilst acknowledging the conclusions reached through the blackpill.
other: any external entity which seeks to impose/regulate values, such as certain judgements or expectations which many are consigned to under the rules of the game.
object of perception: life outcomes, or an end-state which may come from a whitepilled perspective.

a consistent or balanced state is one whose affect valence multiplies out to a positive result. so in seeking stabilization, one views social norms as negative, and as such retreats from them, recognizing that preferred outcomes (X) under external forces which regulate said outcomes (O) is positive, which would entail a balanced state. if one views preferred outcomes as positively attainable, yet still begrudges society, there will be an imbalance if the map from O to X is positive, which would require an agent to unconsciously modify their own bias against O.

self-improvement efforts which positively align with social norms will still cause an imbalance if the subject views society negatively, which he inevitably will under the strict conditions of the blackpill. an immediate solution which comes to mind without needing to forfeit one's own self-autonomy would be to reject the positive mapping of O onto X in favor of pursuing an ideal of self-improvement which does not strictly align with social expectations (P to O negative, O to X negative, P to X positive): but this could have adverse consequences, such as social disengagement, though i suppose if you have already accepted the blackpill you won't worry too much about this. so long as there is a technical balance, it is certainly very achievable i.e accepting reality, managing social pressures and judicatively acting in reference to them.

 

[Tabula Rasa]

View attachment 1988

subject: an individual who has accepted the blackpill and now seeks balance through the whitepill, either through stabilization or self-improvement. the subject seeks to resolve internal and external imbalances whilst acknowledging the conclusions reached through the blackpill.
other: any external entity which seeks to impose/regulate values, such as certain judgements or expectations which many are consigned to under the rules of the game.
object of perception: life outcomes, or an end-state which may come from a whitepilled perspective.

a consistent or balanced state is one whose affect valence multiplies out to a positive result. so in seeking stabilization, one views social norms as negative, and as such retreats from them, recognizing that preferred outcomes (X) under external forces which regulate said outcomes (O) is positive, which would entail a balanced state. if one views preferred outcomes as positively attainable, yet still begrudges society, there will be an imbalance if the map from O to X is positive, which would require an agent to unconsciously modify their own bias against O.

self-improvement efforts which positively align with social norms will still cause an imbalance if the subject views society negatively, which he inevitably will under the strict conditions of the blackpill. an immediate solution which comes to mind without needing to forfeit one's own self-autonomy would be to reject the positive mapping of O onto X in favor of pursuing an ideal of self-improvement which does not strictly align with social expectations (P to O negative, O to X negative, P to X positive): but this could have adverse consequences, such as social disengagement, though i suppose if you have already accepted the blackpill you won't worry too much about this. so long as there is a technical balance, it is certainly very achievable i.e accepting reality, managing social pressures and judicatively acting in reference to them.

Thank you, this is helpful. I'm not well-versed in psychology but I can see how it's useful for providing a framework to explain the Whitepill, and it will be interesting to see how psychological theories can be implemented into the Whitepill overall.

an immediate solution which comes to mind without needing to forfeit one's own self-autonomy would be to reject the positive mapping of O onto X in favor of pursuing an ideal of self-improvement which does not strictly align with social expectations (P to O negative, O to X negative, P to X positive)

Regarding this point, I've come to the same conclusion which I've written about in a previous thread, suggesting that the term 'self development' should be used rather than self-improvement.

Theory - Tabula Rasa's Introduction to the Whitepill

Blackpill was never the final destination What one may not realise is that the Blackpill is only a stop along the way, rather than the end destination which some would make their hill to die upon. Whitepill was always the natural extension following the Blackpill, Whitepill being a higher form...

elysianfields.se

 

[autistic_tendencies]

I’m wu wei maxing
Hahahaha

 

[Ultimate Subhuman]

Every single molecule

 

[Pisspot]

Path where you contribute to change society

 

[VladislavDeGeso]

Will you take the Path of Improvement? Or the Path of Stabilization?

"If the Blackpill teaches you how the world works, it is only natural the next step is to apply this knowledge in a practical approach to life. The Blackpill will tell you how things suck if you're ugly, but not how to move on with your life; how to live." - SergeantIncel

View attachment 1902

The above are two terms which were introduced by SergeantIncel in his threads about the Whitepill. The Paths are described as follows,



Let's further explore this idea of 'life paths' that Serge laid out. When an individual reaches a crucial point or juncture in life, they will oftentimes come at a crossroads where they will need to make an important life-altering decision. This crossroads analogy also marks an individual's transition from the Blackpill to the Whitepill.

Once an individual has reached the end of their Blackpill journey, they are faced with a choice to make regarding what they would do next. One could choose to not go any further past the Blackpill, essentially leaving them at a standstill. It's not THE wrong choice to make but it is certainly not an ideal one, and it definitely does not necessitate positive life outcomes or quality of life.

If an individual decides to move forward with the Blackpill knowledge they have attained, hence becoming Whitepilled, they will have to end up choosing a path for themself. This choice is an individual one, depending on the whims and circumstances of the individual, and no path is necessarily the right one. Someone may decide to reject society, focusing on minimising pain and creating a stable life for themself, hence choosing the Path of stabilisation, while another may choose to accept society and focus on improving different aspects of their life (Path of improvement). Sergeant notes that the paths are not mutually exclusive, (and one can always take what is useful and beneficial for them from each of the paths) but one would usually go more towards one path than the other.

This is a concept which I will term the Whitepill Crossroads and one which I argue should be the central, encompassing theory of the Whitepill.

View attachment 1920

This is an idea that has room for further exploration; for instance, are there sub-paths to the existing paths, or are there any other additional paths that we haven't accounted for?

Thanks for reading.

its possible to take both tbh. That's what I plan to do. "Improvement" but still avoid mainstream society.