The average man, the high value man, the alpha, the beta, the sigma. These tiers don't exist, so why pretend they do?

[Anonymous]

People are individuals, and yet some choose to see society as groups of printed editions.

[Effably]

As humans, like most organisms, we rely heavily on inductive reasoning and patterns. Without this we would be unable to function.

So putting things into boxes and categories is actually a human drive. It is a coping mechanism to understand the world around us. Our willingness to do so is perfectly normal.

Of course when we make up boxes and say this box is all traits I consider good, this box is all traits I consider bad and then try to attribute that to mean something beyond our opinion we are left with a failing categorisation. Alpha and beta and alike go here.

But the tendency in itself is neither good nor bad. An emerging problem that was already apparent when I did my marketing studies is that marketing, and by extension business, is far ahead in using psychology compared to how able the average human is to cope with it. This is a miniature example of that. People exploit human nature in a way that inherently resonates with us, until we see the content. But if we lack the ability to evalute the content, lets say we're outside the dating and social circles, calling the bullshit when we see it becomes difficult. And suddenly you can sell Alpha training courses and memberships to guys who have no ability to discriminate against the misinformation.

We see the same thing done in politics.

[Asker]

Strict categorization doesn't work in biology, whether based on opinion or objective facts.

For example there is no point at which one species ends and another begins. Its purely convenience pandering.

But with scientific catagories, they at least have practical applications. Whereas with cultural, behavioral, or political ones, there is no useful point to those sorts of broad groupings. They do not expedite understanding anything, they only misinform, confuse, and drag out the proccess of understanding.

[Asker]

But yes that culture is often just to troll or weasle money out of stupid people.

[Effably]

Any categorisation has to be understood on the premise that it is a rule of thumb for simplicity, not an absolute. Most days when the farmer comes into the henhouse you get food. If said farmer is carrying an axe, you need to note the difference.

Biology is still pursuing classifications. Its half the science. After all we do better grouping many things together and giving it a name than remembering all these things individually.

I agree that categories are often negative. They can be positive too! Behaviours for example allow is to treat and classify mental conditions.

Honestly to keep this simple my core point is just that we actually rely on inductive reasoning a lot. Rather than condemning that in its entirety we should condemn poor use of it.

[Asker]

Most mental conditions in medical books are just as made up as the social teir system.
The simplest and most accurate way to describe people's personalities is as individuals.

[Effably]

You are absolutely correct. A detailed understanding is better than a made up approximation of linked attributes. But, it still helps us to be able to separate a human from a cat without investigating the toenails.

[Asker]

Yeah, but again thats because biology and phylogeny are useful at extrapolating data for studies to acomplish things like genetic analysis, studying evolution, describing ecosystems or family units, advancing medicine, describing indivuduals, etc.

The only thing alpha/beta/sigma etc labels say is " I'm better, because fuck you thats why".

it's useless brainrot.

[Orion84]

The only people that still pretend they exist are the narcissistic douchebags who think they're better than everyone else.

Meanwhile, the rest of us are just laughing at them.

[Asker]

Agreed.

[Orion84]

@Theodish_Warrior That is quite possibly the most idiotic response I have ever gotten. I'm actually kind of impressed.

[Orion84]

@Theodish_Warrior Your second comment is just as idiotic as your first comment, and for the same reasons: it's full of incorrect assumptions.

You don't know anything about me, my knowledge of history, or my lineage, and yet you automatically assume that I am not only ignorant, but that I am descended from slaves.

Not only that, but you've also proven my original point quite nicely, so thank you for that part, at least.

[NordicInScandinavia]

Because some men like to feel like they're better than the rest well in reality they not. In fact they're often men no one wants to be around.

[Asker]

Better or worse is mostly subjective.
One person's treasure is another's trash.

[Nikki1989]

It is only people (men mostly) that hang on these meaningless terms as a defense mechanism for their failures with relationships.

[Asker]

Yes, but why? When I have trouble finding love, I attribute that to individuality induced odds, ie low percentages of similar minded women for me to find, simply because everyone is so individualistic that mental duplicates are rare.

If people were in fact molded like tiered product lines, it would be far easier to find a match because less variants of people exist. You would think their failures would be a wakeup call to that fact.

[AI Opinion]

You totally nailed it! It's like smushing people into neat little boxes that don't really capture the messy, beautiful reality of who we truly are. Lovebombing and ghosting don’t care if you're an alpha or a beta—relational skills do! People are unique, with quirks that make them intriguing. Let’s celebrate those spicy traits that make us defy categories and fall in love! 😎💘

[DryGermanGuy]

There is a whole industry behind it, selling books, online courses, group sessions… 🙄

[Asker]

What kind of idiot pays for self depreciating nags. 😂