Deleted member 15827
Will be back
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2021
- Posts
- 19,769
- Reputation
- 24,199
Inb4 " muh daily height face thread "
The problem with all height vs face threads until now:
The problem was never defined accurately. Each camp selected examples or anomalies that suited their own viewpoints and set out to prove themselves right. Manlets liked the comments supporting face and tallfags repped the comments supporting height
Framing the problem:
To end this constant back and forth once and for all one has to frame the problem in such a way that is agreeable to both parties. The result may still be up in the air, but a clearly defined problem is essential .
A good way to frame the problem:
Enter John Rawls.
"Rawls's theory of "justice as fairness" recommends equal basic liberties, equality of opportunity, and facilitating the maximum benefit to the least advantaged members of society in any case where inequalities may occur. Rawls's argument for these principles of social justice uses a thought experiment called the "original position", in which people deliberately select what kind of society they would choose to live in if they did not know which social position they would personally occupy. "
This is relevant I promise. Personally I feel the question aims at which factor would prevent inceldom rather than which factor gets you the best QOL and best quality chicks- since that is just so rare and down to absurd luck.
Now the original position is the greatest idea to tackle this question since it means we as individuals have revoked our personal attributes and are right now freely floating spirits in the air who can choose either face or height.
"Each individual, however, deliberates behind a "veil of ignorance": each lacks knowledge, for example, of his or her gender, race, age, intelligence, wealth, skills, education and religion. The only thing that a given member knows about themselves is that they are in possession of the basic capacities necessary to fully and wilfully participate in an enduring system of mutual cooperation; each knows they can be a member of the society."
So with this idea in mind, how would you go about choosing your attributes? Keep in mind height is a normal distribution and face is positively skewed
Height:
Face:
looksmax.org
So with this in mind the most logical option would be to go for height since the probability of you getting a good enough face to offset the low weighted residue you chose on getting a good height is too risky.
Contrawise once your weighted residue on getting a good height most likely pays off , the fact that you'll mostly have a normie face doesn't matter since you're already in the 80 th and above percentile of SMV.
QED bitches.
The problem with all height vs face threads until now:
The problem was never defined accurately. Each camp selected examples or anomalies that suited their own viewpoints and set out to prove themselves right. Manlets liked the comments supporting face and tallfags repped the comments supporting height
Framing the problem:
To end this constant back and forth once and for all one has to frame the problem in such a way that is agreeable to both parties. The result may still be up in the air, but a clearly defined problem is essential .
A good way to frame the problem:
Enter John Rawls.
"Rawls's theory of "justice as fairness" recommends equal basic liberties, equality of opportunity, and facilitating the maximum benefit to the least advantaged members of society in any case where inequalities may occur. Rawls's argument for these principles of social justice uses a thought experiment called the "original position", in which people deliberately select what kind of society they would choose to live in if they did not know which social position they would personally occupy. "
This is relevant I promise. Personally I feel the question aims at which factor would prevent inceldom rather than which factor gets you the best QOL and best quality chicks- since that is just so rare and down to absurd luck.
Now the original position is the greatest idea to tackle this question since it means we as individuals have revoked our personal attributes and are right now freely floating spirits in the air who can choose either face or height.
"Each individual, however, deliberates behind a "veil of ignorance": each lacks knowledge, for example, of his or her gender, race, age, intelligence, wealth, skills, education and religion. The only thing that a given member knows about themselves is that they are in possession of the basic capacities necessary to fully and wilfully participate in an enduring system of mutual cooperation; each knows they can be a member of the society."
So with this idea in mind, how would you go about choosing your attributes? Keep in mind height is a normal distribution and face is positively skewed
Height:
Face:
Male Attractiveness (Face) is NOT Normally Distributed
Normal Distribution Implies You See Just as Many Ugly People as Good Looking Ones, which I don't agree with tbh. First off, this is my rating scale for PSL. You can agree or disagree with the exactness, but allow me ± .25 in digression. Sub 4 PSL (Normie-ish and Below) 4-4.75 PSL (Normie to...
looksmax.org
So with this in mind the most logical option would be to go for height since the probability of you getting a good enough face to offset the low weighted residue you chose on getting a good height is too risky.
Contrawise once your weighted residue on getting a good height most likely pays off , the fact that you'll mostly have a normie face doesn't matter since you're already in the 80 th and above percentile of SMV.
QED bitches.
