mASF post by "Prime Alpha"
posted on: mASF forum: Advanced Discussion, May 5, 2005On 5/25/05 8:08:22 PM, finalD wrote:
>The premise Prime Alpha has, that he is
>somehow disagreeing with the
>"theorem" (below), is problematic,
>because his replacement theory
>operates on identical principles.
>
>Those principles are, that internal
>thoughts somehow manifest themselves
>in external behaviors which, in turn,
>communicate ("subcommunicate") to
>the target female the concept of
>desirability.
>
>In other words ... INNER GAME». Prime
>Alpha just wants to rename what we
>are doing with inner game» as "feeling
>relaxed". Hell, who cares what you
>call it?
As I explained in another post, regarding all these causality catastrophes, we
SHOULD care what we call it.
Indeed, my explanation rests on the EXACT same principles. However, my
explanation is that one should know that being RELAXED is the prime causal
factor [as well as lack of negative anxiety signals which turn off]. Either one
should just control this, or visualize something positive.
The reason I dislike negative visualizations [such as "a$$hole"], is because
even though they may relax the subject, he may do things IN ACCORDANCE with the
visualized character, such as... be an a$$hole.
Visualize James Bond (subtle yet very assertive) or Fight-Club's Tyler Durden
(straightforward, naughty in the good sense - with the exception of blowing
buildings up :).
THOSE are GOOD, POSITIVE visualizations.
Why visualize an a$$hole ?
|
