Deleted member 6403
Made It Out The Hood
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2020
- Posts
- 56,214
- Reputation
- 96,760
Ever since I found out how drastically diet and environment shape personality and appearance, I've realized no one is actually unique. Good looks and charming personality mean the person has lived his/her life in a good environment, not that the person is actually a good/unique/special human being. AKA you just lucked out because your mom decided to raise you on butter instead of Crisco. Or you lucked out because you found Dr. Peat.
People who have good personalities simply were exposed to more progesterone and less estrogen over their lifetime, whereas people who are resentful, unconfident, not empathetic didn't receive much love from their parents in infancy. Very little of it is controlled by conscious choice.
People who look good are people who have access to high quality food, whereas people who are not so attractive do not.
Even things like being optimistic in the face of adversity, which people consider to be a choice, is just a function of blood sugar levels.
People might think they are making a choice as to how they behave but the fact is that the feeling comes first and the rationalization comes second, not the other way around as the majority believe.
I think attraction to people is not because of who they are but rather because of the resources they have access to, even though we might not realize it consciously. We don't have innate personalities. We are nothing but reflections of the environment we have lived in.
If someone unluckily grew up on PUFA, then he/she is screwed in so many aspects through no fault of his/her own relative to someone who grew up on butter.
So what's the point? No one is inherently better than or worse than anyone else, we are all the same blank canvas, just painted different colors by the environment, so no one is ever actually worthy of respect or admiration and similarly no one is worthy of disrespect, because they themselves are not responsible for their good/bad qualities, the environment they grew up in is.
People who have good personalities simply were exposed to more progesterone and less estrogen over their lifetime, whereas people who are resentful, unconfident, not empathetic didn't receive much love from their parents in infancy. Very little of it is controlled by conscious choice.
People who look good are people who have access to high quality food, whereas people who are not so attractive do not.
Even things like being optimistic in the face of adversity, which people consider to be a choice, is just a function of blood sugar levels.
People might think they are making a choice as to how they behave but the fact is that the feeling comes first and the rationalization comes second, not the other way around as the majority believe.
I think attraction to people is not because of who they are but rather because of the resources they have access to, even though we might not realize it consciously. We don't have innate personalities. We are nothing but reflections of the environment we have lived in.
If someone unluckily grew up on PUFA, then he/she is screwed in so many aspects through no fault of his/her own relative to someone who grew up on butter.
So what's the point? No one is inherently better than or worse than anyone else, we are all the same blank canvas, just painted different colors by the environment, so no one is ever actually worthy of respect or admiration and similarly no one is worthy of disrespect, because they themselves are not responsible for their good/bad qualities, the environment they grew up in is.
