Can anyone tell my why the cryptic pepe turtle says that the endless expansion of this sentence rights the course of...

The endless expansion of the sentence is not what is going to right the course, the REALISATION that the endless expansion of a formal system of logical inference will never result in decision or recognition, without the intervention of a mind holding a priori rules for determining what count as valid inferences, is what will right his course. It's a reference to Lewis Carroll's send-up of Achilles and the tortoise debating logic.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Tortoise_Said_to_Achilles

The position of the tortoise is broadly "intuitionist" in the Poincaré sense: some kind of intuition, wisdom, or otherwise supra-logical deciding factor is necessary for formal systems to possess "form" to begin with. Subjects, human beings, decide what constitute the formal conditions of a formal system, AND whether the formal conditions are being obeyed, AND whether some logical coup has been pulled off within any given system at any given time. Logic, at least the logic of syllogism and symbolic algebra, is not a free-floating "system" with its own power to compel assent. Human beings construct formal systems, often over time and through shared practice and shared assumptions. Formal systems live and die, continue to be accepted or break down, depending on continued human use and re-uptake of them.

This perspective goes back to Pascal's "spirit of finesse," to medieval nominalism, and to early medieval and ancient debates over the assent-compelling "power" (or lack thereof) of logic. It's related to the problem of whether logic, and logically grounded mathematics, is discovered or invented. Stupid people reduce this to a debate between radical nominalism and thus relativism vs. radical, immediately realist "platonism" (a misnomer). But that's not what it is. You can be a realist with regard to the structure of the world, and even the structure of fundamental "logical laws" (the principle of noncontradiction, e.g.), without IDENTIFYING those real structures and laws simplistically with whatever random formal/algebraic system you are using as a vehicle for discussing them.

I want to make the point of order that even though it's almost definitely a reference to this Achilles story (which I am now looking up and enjoying), the meme is still entirely *about* what I said here , the silly logic story is just a good and very memorable back drop to make the author's brute point that "just be yourself" is useless advice.

I feel like this needs to be explained for autists here. Something having a reference to something else doesn't meant that reference is 'the point'.

Well the same joke is in the original, it's just the joke being repurposed. It's funny and cleverly done, it was also timely because the uselessness of "just be urself" was still a live meme on /r9k/ when this was made. Now it's so diffused and taken for granted that the image probably just seems like a riff on an old chestnut.

I miss the pioneer days of woman hating. I feel like a cowboy after the death of the Old West.

yeah this OP. I think the point of the sentence expanding endlessly is because 1) if you are to ask for any social advice in real life this is the number one reply you are going to get from anyone, so the amount of time you will hear this is figuratively endless 2) if you were to ask the person saying this what they mean, they will not be able to tell you, because it's meant to sound deep but is extremely shallow, non-committal and even malicious. If a good friend were ever to say this to me I'd actually reappraise our friendship because it's just a dickish thing to say and to me indicates an inability to identify with the other person. Maybe more charitably, the person says it cause they don't want to give advice for fear of offending you (which to me is a sign of a shitty dishonest friend who isn't interested in your wellbeing, then again most "friends" are friends because they want to feel good around you, not because they want to help you deal with your issues). It could just as well be explained by laziness, or the other person also being emotionally vulnerable

> (OP)
>yeah this (OP) OP.

Attached: 1583981679448s.jpg (250x145, 4.43K)

I mean to reply to this guy OP

>they will not be able to tell you,
I also forgot to to add that people will sometimes repeat the statement or rephrase it if you ask for clarification, which also resembles the tortoise's endless reply

There is another possibility which I think is the right one, at least a lot of the time. They literally think it is good advice, because they don't understand anything else. They view the world as "people generally fit unless they're egregiously evil/weird" and "the world is generally a nice place worth wanting to fit into." Problems exist, people get unhappy, but everything is solved by better access to socializing and hedonism, or getting over a momentary problem or trauma. The world is fundamentally good.

William James calls most people "once-born," meaning they are born once and everything already makes sense to them, so they never have to deal with years of frustration and misalignment with the world and ultimately be "born again" into a truer, more conscious life with a coherent worldview that makes sense of all the things that formerly didn't make sense.

Most normies don't understand why you're unhappy, and they don't understand why you don't fit in, because their definition of happiness is fitting in, and their definition of fitting in is "going with the flow." They don't realize that it takes years of going with the flow for all the non-fitting parts of you to be slowly eroded and sanded down until your peg can fit in any hole.

It's actually painful for them to understand or think about things like this, because it's "weird." You asking a normie "Have you ever thought YOU'RE wrong and bending until one fits is the wrong thing to do in some situations, or this situation?" is the same subjectively, from a normie's perspective, as a complete autistic furry chrischan retard asking you "Have you ever thought maybe I'm valid the way I am?" You would say to him, "dude it's okay to be a little weird but this is too far." That's how a normie feels when you ask them if there's something more to life than "going out." You are both hurting them and insulting them at the same time. They feel the gravitational pull of what everybody else does weighing them down to the much more reasonable, common sense answer that you're a fruit and you need to relax.

They have a few thought termination loops they get hooked on too, like the relax thing. If you are trying to convince a normie that maybe he's wrong, and this instance of weirdness is okay or better than being a normie, he's already feeling intense pressure to conform to normiehood, which will eventually manifest as "you made me do this" style cruelty toward the weird person. But if you sperg out and write a 7 paragraph Yea Forums post trying to explain this in itself, the normie will feel the overpowering urge to say "loollllll why do you care so much" or "oookay dude wow all i said was eat some dirt like we're all doing, you don't see me complaining about eating the dirt and i'm pretty tall..," because they saw various tall and well dressed confident happy people say similar things over the years, or on television and in movies.

I agree with this, it pretty much always has some level of malice in it.

I agree with the general sentiment, I think you're missing something here though:
> That's how a normie feels when you ask them if there's something more to life than "going out.
The truth is that they know that 'going out' (to bars) is a hollow expression of wealth. Most of them don't even do it that often, they know it doesn't really work. Pointing this out to them makes them uncomfortable, because the whole reason they do it is to keep up this fake image of having fun and getting laid. Things just don't really happen in bars.

Yeah, I completely agree. This tends to be my personal experience too. It's called the just world fallacy.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis

There's a lot of hatred around the term 'normie' or whatever, but I've basically only used it to describe people like this. It seems like most of the people you'd get advice from are already in their own pre-existing feedback loops with their own solidified tastes or moralistic beliefs (what one 'ought' to do, what they believe is right vs wrong, or who they believe)

Don't get me wrong, I know there's social-standards and general laws forcing us to conform. It's just non-sensical if you end up stuck on the outside though. That's how everyone gives you platitudes over and over or exploits you for their own agendas, making you look stupid for even asking, or generally giving you pointless thought terminating advice like "don't overthink it"

Some people legitimately don't know any different from their own already-defined worldview, then they'll go any length to crucify you or give unhelpful advice because that's conveniently all they knew to begin with

Attached: 1570618657745.jpg (727x868, 237.13K)

Really the lesson to take away is not to ask for advice. It shows weakness.

Didn't get it
Gets it

Getting the cute references is not the same as getting the actual message, as I explained.

Attached: 50673F9A-CE94-4C0A-9664-3DC31CFE3641.jpg (567x599, 141.26K)

But you didn't get the message.
The turtle meant what it said, getting a gf is easy if you just B.E yourself, and the only way to B.E yourself is to comprehend that you will never arrive at any meaning so you can clear your mind and simply be yourself.

Yeah but no. It's clearly showing pepe as fucking with wojak, who leaves the conversation at least as retarded as he was when he entered.

No, you just got filtered by an MSpaint comic. It'd do you well to reflect on it for a bit, the turtle has wisdom.

this

ngl you did get a little filtered.
it doesnt have a definite “POINT”. its supposed to be cheekily shit-eating-grinnily left open. it might mean something and it might just be fucking with you. thats whats entertaining about it.
good point.

isnt it a parrable, not a book? like a paragraph or two long?

The lot of you are philosophizing pepe the frog. Close this thread and go read a fucking book.

You are on a Laotian shoe manufacturing forum. Close this thread and go read a fucking book

>"loollllll why do you care so much"

That's a good write up, thank you for the reply
Yeah, it's funny how a lot of these kind of "zen" statements of the so-called chill person like "just be yourself" or "dude, just chill down", or "why are you so angry dude", are loaded with a huge dose of passive aggression and social coercion.

>The truth is that they know that 'going out' (to bars) is a hollow expression of wealth.
I'm not sure of that, though. There is a lot of hocus pocus and mystification going on in social events like clubbing, drinking at bars, and just partying generally. A lot of it is sunk-cost fallacy. These people invest a lot of their social life/free time into these events that they are self-perpetuating and they need to keep justifying them to themselves and others. That means they have to extract every moment from these events to make them appear as glamorous as possible for themselves (and, now, with ubiquitous cameras and social media, to everyone else). So social events are used by the in-crowds to promote each other in the social hierarchy and then to also promote the exclusivity of their social function, which creates a desire in others (jealousy, essentially) to join them at these occasions, so they can get a slice of the "fun" (which boils down into a formula of drugs, and being positively gossiped about). So this requires a kind of pyramid scheme where people lower in the social hierarchy have to recruit others to join the social occasions in order to increase demand to join the party, to increase their own status, and also which increases exclusivity because not everyone can be accomodated, which creates jealousy and further drives up the desire to try to join the "party". I don't know if this makes sense or if it sounds autistic cause I'm quite tired, but I really think that a lot of these social dynamics kind of manufacture normyism and it's quite poisonous and nobody actually understands the vortex they are being sucked into. That is to say, they are not even free thinking agents in this scenario and if you point it all out it kind of dismantles their whole social universe and their sense of social equilibrium.
>keep up this fake image of having fun and getting laid.
That's definitely true, which is why exaggerated and "fun" stories about what the most popular or crazy people did are so popular in the rumor mill. These are idealize myths about what people "want" to be, like they want their real lives to be like American Pie or whatever teen comedy they saw as kids.

I always assumed it meant that "being yourself" is meaningless advice, with no real purpose, because you are still trying to appeal to someone else, thus failing to just be yourself.

Trying to pontificate to genuine dumb rabble is one of the gayest things you can possibly do. By "dumb rabble" I mean people who are too dumb to perform work requiring complex effort and symbol manipulation. Which is the majority of the population. If you never made it into a good college or program then you should have become a stem bugman. Failing that, just accept your fate. You're being fed to the wolves

GNU stands for "GNU's Not Unix" and then it's turtles all the way down user. Think real super hard about it, surely you will reach Enlightenment

For getting girls it isn’t useless advice. If you are so insecure that you have to put up a front and pretend to be a character to impress anyone then you already lost. Being yourself means not putting up all these fronts, whether that is pretending to be masculine, the people-pleaser, the guy who everyone likes, etc. This is a lot easier said than done of course because we have been conditioned to act in a certain way. If you see yourself as somebody who is unwanted, or worse better than everyone else then no wonder you believe it’s useless advice..

Nobody posting on Yea Forums has accepted their fate, you included
seething and trolling is not acceptance

>If you are so insecure that you have to put up a front and pretend to be a character to impress anyone then you already lost.
People do that all the time. The whole point of attracting girls is to create a fake persona that they are attracted to. They just are better at lying because they don't have any qualms lying about themselves in a social situation.
>If you see yourself as somebody who is unwanted, or worse better than everyone else then no wonder you believe it’s useless advice..
Yeah that's the point. People are asking for social advice is because "who they are" is not desirable. To take an example, if I come to believe that I am objectively annoying (e.g. people walk away from conversations with me or start making fun of how I talk or how they don't like the topics I talk about), then, yeah, who I am is not working. Then, the reason people start to be "conditioned to act a certain way" is because, in the first place, they had some undesirable personality or social features which were originally pushing people away and they sought to adjust their behavior accordingly to try to have better success. But, yeah, adjusting your behavior is extremely hard and usually backfires, but not because it's "artificial", but because it just creates more issues. So, for example, if I went from an annoying loudmouth to trying to be more thoughtful, the metric I am adjusting to in my head might have terrible side-effects I didn't anticipate, like being too quiet in a conversation, trying to people please etc. etc. The fact of the matter is either remaining the same or trying to change is a dice roll.

It points a hole at the basis of reasoning by exposing infinite regress, I see it as a humorous version of Achilles and the tortoise.

Introvert take. Nothing wrong with being an introvert, but you forgot to account for extroverts actually liking social interaction and needing it to relax. If they didn't go out to social events, they'd become drained and irritable and unhappy. Also, the exclusion thing may apply to status seekers, but most normals are happy to go out with their friend groups to eat or hang out or drink or whatever, and that both kills time and satisfies their extroverted nature.

>The truth is that they know that 'going out' (to bars) is a hollow expression of wealth.
An expression of what type of wealth? And why would people put value in this type of expression? Do you mean something like, it is done for the sake of appearances, because if so this is not exactly accurate. People enjoy bars because they are social areas where they can engage with their friends and new people, relax, eat, and drink. It really isn't hollow.

true enough, but I'll offer some responses tomorrow

The majority of people who give this advice, who are well-adjusted to some generic social context, are themselves constantly putting up fronts and fishing for approval. People are trained into it from childhood by similar advice, "just give it a shot", "just try getting along", and it's not as though socialization is something humans can or should avoid. We're social by nature.
Social fronting is as unavoidable as hierarchy or empathy or conflict or any aspect of the human condition. It is healthy in some proportion. Even in social or religious groups where true genuine behaviour is an ideal, there is social conditioning. So, it's not about not putting up fronts, it's about putting up a front you can live with comfortably or else becoming comfortable that you're gonna be part of one group of genuine outcasts or another.
The problem is that with increasing technological uptake, the penetrance of brute social hazing is so deep that you can't even be a put-together recluse without being ridiculed by gen.pop. or radicalized by bitter outcast elements. Past societies had sanctioned groups of outcasts who weren't really seen as losers and who were not defined by some rigorous profession or impossible elite expectation.
There are no monasteries in the developed world, there are imageboards and subreddits and Telegram groups which turn people who resent superficial behaviour into extremists. People aren't humble enough to tolerate groups like that. They deflect and give you some condescending advice then go posture and share "no bitches" memes on social media even though they're mid-20s sexless medicated drones.
But this is a tired dead-horse topic, we all know about DFW, and we all know about the general moral crisis in American society since the postwar period, and this has really been an impossible problem even since the Elizabethan period because of largescale urbanization and religious sectarianism. Even then, for instance with the lethal political circus of early America, it was possible for example to get out of duels and social ridicule if you were publicly known as a devout religious person.
Technology makes socialization more absolute and the spread of subcultures / political radicalism, unmatched in technological society, means people will purposefully be condescending to members of other subcultures even if they tolerate their own in-group.

Attached: 1642796787623.webm (640x640, 2.81M)

It reminds me of Deridda's notion of the deferall of meaing. I've always read the meme as pointing to the absuridty of language: that of a system that refers to other signs but we can never arrive at a meaning of a particular sign in of itself.

Insightful post user.

Thank you for sharing it.

>put up a front
Everyone has a persona, user. You are a completely different person in private from what you show people publicly.
>pretending
Again, everyone does this. It's dishonest to deny it especially when we're anonymous.
>being yourself means not putting up all these fronts
That's ridiculous. I can tell right now that you aren't very self-aware, and honestly I would hate to see you in a social situation, projecting all this insecure unconscious content onto others.

It's 100% situational, there is no such thing as a true-self, 'be yourself' is a tautology. It's impossible to be anyone other than yourself. I suppose you're right in one way though, it's all conditioning, and if you ask another person for social advice then you've already failed yourself personally

Attached: 1646233685737.jpg (641x355, 105.16K)

plenty of engineers are massive normies.

Based on the context, I'm pretty sure that faggot considers all engineers to be STEM bugmen with the only person of worth being an user Going His Own Way in a top-10 literature degree
If user clarifies and this isn't the case, I apologise for calling him a faggot

Attached: 1640268587070.jpg (800x800, 181.95K)

Good to see that after so many years, the teachings of Kaliacc still reverberate among midwits everywhere

I find your choice of image amusing, since it puts fresh in my mind the Hedgehog's Dilemma.

Attached: taped hedgehog.jpg (1242x1336, 152.05K)

It depends entirely what you mean by "point", and I'm going with a simple definition since OP came out and said he didn't even get what I was saying. Lots of people here really can't see the forest for the trees.

Drinking is sincerely fun, drinking with friends is even more so. If you disagree, you are very, very different from these people in a way that goes far beyond my own disagreements with them. Bars are a different story, though. There may have been a time when 'culture' actually happened in them, and it may still have some sincerity in certain places and communities (professionals in New York maybe?), but for most normies they just go there once in a while and only socialize with the same people they'd drink with at home, basically just to prove they can.

As far as getting laid, you basically hear about it every single time it happens. If a guy you know has mentioned two girls he took home from a bar, those are probably the only two girls in his whole life. There's rarely much of a lower part to the 'iceberg'.

Nah, you're wrong. The natural version of any man is not palatable. We only say this because we've gotten used to a particular image of a man 'being themselves' that is colorful, friendly, and based, but that is at least as much an act as anything else. The 'real' version of any man is very petty and sensitive, and improving involves suppressing that version of you to the point that you forget it's there.

>An expression of what type of wealth?
How many kinds are there? Money. Drinks in bars cost lots of money, especially ones that aren't total dive bars that hobos hang out in. Clothes also cost money, this is usually a major consideration in the minds of people who regular go to bars.
>People enjoy bars because they are social areas where they can engage with their friends and new people, relax, eat, and drink
You're describing two separate things as if they are one. A place to relax and eat with friends is a restaurant with a bar in it, you have your own table and don't really meet other people there. You meet people in dedicated bars that don't serve food, which is an experience that most people find at least slightly uncomfortable and eventually give up on and go back to just going to something like Applebees a few times a month.

"Normie" isn't the same as successful and normal looking. It fits into the mold of this tribal gossip ethos that is dominated by women. And there's an IQ / status cutoff where you still have to save face and sometimes play politics but there isn't a blade to your neck if you talk good and aren't intensely interested in low culture

>this tribal gossip ethos that is dominated by women
I was thinking about how much this has infused itself with the fabric of society. Women walking around all whored up and potentially available really fucks men up. Every man under 40 is perpetually trying to attract women like a peacock now, dressing up and getting fag haircuts.

I could never put my finger on what was different about depictions of society before loose single women were everywhere, but it's this. Men in older depictions of society look like they didn't give a fuck, and it's because they didn't. All they had to worry about encountering was other men. All they had to worry about being encountered by was men. So they didn't care if they were bald or ugly, or "unfashionable," because men barely give a shit about that. They could be basically professional and they were golden.

Once women are on the loose, potentially but rarely actually giving out sex, men regress into pathetic peacocking chimps. It happens slowly at first but now every man is practically a woman with how much effort we put into "looking god" and literally waxing our facial hair like a bunch of queers. Everybody's obsessed with height, everybody's obsessed with degenerate fashions and metrosexual primping.

Women did this. I want to go back to being a bald dude talking to other bald dudes and everybody's short and nobody notices. Fitness culture is fine but even that could be de-gayed once women are no longer the implicit motivation.

you can never be "yourself" you are always playing a role.

You can be yourself, that's the point of the riddle. It's just futile to try to be yourself or know what that even means, the only way to be yourself is to NOT try and instead comprehend that it means nothing, then being yourself is effortless.

It’s of course a reference to Zeno’s Paradox and the story of Achilles and the Tortoise; but it’s also a genuinely meaningful Pepe koan worth reflecting on.

Wojak, in his neurotic and failed Apollonian striving to make something worthy and dignified of himself, is caught within a bad infinity. Impotent and paralyzed by his own doubt, unloved and alone, he looks for answers and guarantees in the advice of others, desperate for any magic words that might suddenly spur him to action, give him some ground to stand on, and make sense of the apparently meaningless world around him: something that can grant him a reason to live. And yet, he hears only cliches. “Just be yourself.”

“Just being” that “yourself” he’s told by others to be is an asymptotic endeavor, Sisyphean. He’ll never “be” anything the longer he keeps searching for himself in commonplaces and the phrases of others; the longer he infinitely cycles between consooming, cooming, dooom and “self”-improooving until the next relapse, the longer he remains what he was trying to not “be.”

The tortoise shows him the way: it’s either the downward spiral or the fire escape. And the only way out is through the blaze. Through Dionysus, the animal, the tortoise, the bee, through a joy greater than the sad passions he’s enslaved by, through a force greater than the one found in a dingy basement gym, through a life shaped by ideals greater than hatred, resentment, and that ever lingering doubt that’s become his only certainty. It’s all just a honk, a bloom, and a buzz away.

Attached: 6432CCD0-8386-4F2E-8935-F31DB8E5CB80.jpg (1000x1000, 69.21K)