Philosophy Now Forum

Greta wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2017 11:55 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2017 5:28 pmNo, I dine with wine. There is a difference.

How many bottles with each meal?

Not enough.

One thought if I may:

Has anybody here read "Nana" by Zola ?
She was not pretty, she could not sing or dance and yet when she appeared on the stage all men fell on their knees in adoration.

She must have had some incredible inner beauty or some charisma.

Men are usually attracted to gorgeous women, but permanently ? Or just for a moment and then they seek something more behind the outer beauty ?

duszek wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2017 5:53 pm One thought if I may:

Has anybody here read "Nana" by Zola ?
She was not pretty, she could not sing or dance and yet when she appeared on the stage all men fell on their knees in adoration.

She must have had some incredible inner beauty or some charisma.

Men are usually attracted to gorgeous women, but permanently ? Or just for a moment and then they seek something more behind the outer beauty ?

Very true. Sometimes a beautiful woman will rely on appearance to get by and just remain self obsessed and superficial. Then when external beauty fades and inner beauty never developes, she is left with nothing.

A beautiful woman flatters the man´s ego.
He (or his genes) were good enough to impress her and to become her partner.

For some men this can be enough.

Some men could expect some other things as a deal: soothing qualities, amiable disposition, soft voice, suprising statements and insights, ...

The point is to find out what you really want. In your heart of hearts.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Sun Sep 03, 2017 9:40 pm she is left with nothing.

Unless she ends up with you and is left with less than nothing.

duszek wrote: ↑Mon Sep 04, 2017 5:41 pm A beautiful woman flatters the man´s ego.
He (or his genes) were good enough to impress her and to become her partner.

For some men this can be enough.

Some men could expect some other things as a deal: soothing qualities, amiable disposition, soft voice, suprising statements and insights, ...

The point is to find out what you really want. In your heart of hearts.

The ideal woman for the modern man has no inner beauty. if she does it is unimportant. Consider what the modern man wants. It is all on the surface. Depth is unimportant since he has been conditioned to lack the depth necessary to appreciate it.

http://www.menshealth.com/sex-women/11- ... fect-woman

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 5:14 am Consider what the modern man wants.

What about what the modern woman wants? Whatever it is, I'm making an educated guess that you haven't got it.

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 5:14 am

duszek wrote: ↑Mon Sep 04, 2017 5:41 pm A beautiful woman flatters the man´s ego.
He (or his genes) were good enough to impress her and to become her partner.

For some men this can be enough.

Some men could expect some other things as a deal: soothing qualities, amiable disposition, soft voice, suprising statements and insights, ...

The point is to find out what you really want. In your heart of hearts.

The ideal woman for the modern man has no inner beauty. if she does it is unimportant. Consider what the modern man wants. It is all on the surface. Depth is unimportant since he has been conditioned to lack the depth necessary to appreciate it.

http://www.menshealth.com/sex-women/11- ... fect-woman

I used to read Men'shealth, they had some interesting articles on nutrition, but psychology was not their long suit.

BTW, I probably wouldn't be considered as a "modern man" by their definition.

Proverbs 21:9 New International Version

Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife.

Women are truly extraordinary in their dual nature. Some women project incredible inner beauty yet others express the other side sufficient to drive men into philosophy.

“By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you will be happy. If you get a bad one, you will be a philosopher.” Socrates

“I follow the example of the rider who wishes to become an expert horseman, none of your soft-mouthed, docile animals for me. The horse for me to own must show some spirit: in the belief, no doubt, if he can manage such an animal, it will be easy enough to deal with every other horse besides. And that is just my case. I wish to deal with human beings, to associate with man in general; hence my choice of wife. I know full well, if I can tolerate her spirit, I can with ease attach myself to every human being else.” -Xenophon (Symposium)

"As a consequence of Socrates’ attitude towards his wife, Xanthippe is often remembered as a shrew, a scolding wife who was a pain in the rear end for philosophy’s most prestigious character. It was said that Xanthippe was so disagreeable that she once poured the contents of a chamber pot over the head of Socrates."

He does have a good point. If women were too agreeable men would not be attracted to philosophy or develop the skills to endure foolish opinions.

I am destined to be a lousy philosopher since I prefer the woman of incredible inner beauty to the necessary pain in the rear.

Harbal wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:07 pm

Nick_A wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 5:14 am Consider what the modern man wants.

What about what the modern woman wants? Whatever it is, I'm making an educated guess that you haven't got it.

What is it with these Progressives, anyway? Can’t get a date?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/h ... tions.html

A modern woman´s criteria may not be conceptualized yet.
So it is not possible to say what they are.

Ambitious literature tries to develop new concepts and thus to extend language and its pool of expressions.

What language is able to express at a given moment is the summet of a iceberg.

duszek wrote: ↑Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:21 am A modern woman´s criteria may not be conceptualized yet.

No two women are the same.

The rest is just prejudice.

Hobbes' Choice wrote: ↑Sun Oct 08, 2017 2:28 pm

duszek wrote: ↑Sun Oct 08, 2017 8:21 am A modern woman´s criteria may not be conceptualized yet.

No two women are the same.

The rest is just prejudice.

Very old fashioned. I'm shocked. Don't you know there are no more individuals. People including women are categorized as parts of a collective. By definition those in the collective are the same. Politicians appeal to the woman's vote of their dominant collective because they are the same with the same concerns.

Treating women as individuals is a conservative value which must be abandoned in favor of modern collectivism. Some women object but modern progressive education will soon teach them the error of their ways and they will become proud representatives of the collective they are placed in.

Due to social interaction people tend to adopt patterns of behaviour, tastes, views etc. of other people whom they admire.

Men and women alike.

duszek wrote: ↑Mon Oct 09, 2017 3:57 pm Due to social interaction people tend to adopt patterns of behaviour, tastes, views etc. of other people whom they admire.

Men and women alike.

Vive la difference! Old fashioned thinking. The French have been proven wrong by the progressives. Men and women are really alike

I guess I'm old fashioned. I liked it better the old fashioned way.