PSL Scale is 1-8! Not 1-10!

D

Deleted member 1100

Fuchsia
Joined
Feb 23, 2019
Posts
12,940
Reputation
29,049
images


"We are special, not only we have to pretend that our scale is objective despite being extremely subjective and we barely can't point what makes someone attractive besides the obvious shit discussed here because we don't know shit about details, we also need to feel different from normies to pretend that we're more intelligent and smart than them!"
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: HowAmIAlive123, Ethnicope, LifeMaxxing and 19 others
Whenever i see someone rate someone out of 8 I cringe hard ngl.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 7173, Deleted member 6402, currymax and 7 others
try modafinil
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Vitruvian, Maxillacel and Griffith
Nigga really had to make a thread about this 🤦‍♂️
 
Whenever i see someone rate someone out of 8 I cringe hard ngl.
I liked your post

But fuck u for liking a post of cringe co user projecting his life story on to me


All of u r crying
 
  • JFL
  • Hmm...
Reactions: RichardSpencel and Deleted member 1100
[cut output image]
 
  • +1
  • Woah
  • JFL
Reactions: RichardSpencel, Deleted member 1464, Deleted member 1100 and 1 other person
Griffith seems cool and knowledgeable tbh
Literally said all sub 5 users should be banned and just joined asking shit like “what does JFL mean?”
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: hebbewem, RichardSpencel and Petsmart
You just can't translate beauty into a number. Simple as. Beauty will always be subjective, even if someone is universally agreed upon to be attractive, that still doesn't make their beauty objective! (an alien might think that person is ugly!)
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 1464
You just can't translate beauty into a number. Simple as. Beauty will always be subjective, even if someone is universally agreed upon to be attractive, that still doesn't make their beauty objective! (an alien might think that person is ugly!)
:bluepill::bluepill::bluepill::bluepill::bluepill:
 
  • +1
Reactions: HighIQcel, LordGodcat and Deleted member 2012
Literally said all sub 5 users should be banned and just joined asking shit like “what does JFL mean?”
81 817848 open eye crying laughing emoji


Even greycels want death to sub 5s.

He's better than most co posters
 
PSL scale should be out of 3

You're either an invisible inel, fuckable after jestermaxxing, or a turbochad who gets sucked off by random jbs in the street
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Vitruvian, Deleted member 2012, middayshowers and 3 others
we have to pretend that our scale is objective despite being extremely subjective and we barely can't point what makes someone attractive besides the obvious shit discussed here because we don't know shit about details
Exactly.
 
Wow, great counter-argument you have there. Retard.
Saying beauty is completely subjective and can’t be put into a rating is bullshit bluepill cope
 
Again, calling it a bluepilled cope isn't a valid counter-argument.
I don’t need to pull up studies to tell you highly paid Super Models and celebrities are more objectively attractive then the average curry
 
Again, calling it a bluepilled cope isn't a valid counter-argument.

You aren't completely correct, there is a subjectivity to beauty/attraction whatever, but it's not like you pictured, even animals find symmetrical and proportional features attractive in their possible mates. Those are two things that can be considered universal and can be translated from species to species, even aliens
 
That isn’t saying much

He also said soft Maxing like hair and skin is all, fuckin lol
Literally said all sub 5 users should be banned and just joined asking shit like “what does JFL mean?”

1. I am not from .co, but from PSL that forum where you amassed thousands of posts in 3+ years, added no significant contribution to Looksmaxing, spread defeatism and was generally despised (much like here).

2. Read my posts again, i did not say that about soft maxing.

3. You are literally proving all my points about truecel users and destroying what little credibility you had.

tumblr_oo3ojizJOu1w4ph5zo1_400.gifv
 
1. I am not from .co, but from PSL that forum where you amassed thousands of posts in 3+ years, added no significant contribution to Looksmaxing, spread defeatism and was generally despised (much like here).

2. Read my posts again, i did not say that about soft maxing.

3. You are literally proving all my points about truecel users and destroying what little credibility you had.

tumblr_oo3ojizJOu1w4ph5zo1_400.gifv
Not a letter

Rent free

Keep crying for me
 
I don’t need to pull up studies to tell you highly paid Super Models and celebrities are more objectively attractive then the average curry
You clearly don't understand what the term objective means. Even if most people agree that someone is universally attractive, this doesn't mean their beauty is objective. Objective things are impossible to deny without contradiction. The length of an object is objective. A square having 4 sides is objective - it would be impossible to deny without contradiction.

Subjective things require a mind (eg. a human perceiver) Subjective things can be denied without contradiction. I can deny someone being beautiful and there is no logical contradiction in doing so. Calling something beautiful is like calling something 'big'. 'Bigness' is not an objective part of an object. I can deny that something is big without contradiction (it might appear small from a far distance, or small to another animal/alien/whatever)
 
  • +1
Reactions: Griffith
You clearly don't understand what the term objective means. Even if most people agree that someone is universally attractive, this doesn't mean their beauty is objective. Objective things are impossible to deny without contradiction. The length of an object is objective. A square having 4 sides is objective - it would be impossible to deny without contradiction.

Subjective things require a mind (eg. a human perceiver) Subjective things can be denied without contradiction. I can deny someone being beautiful and there is no logical contradiction in doing so. Calling something beautiful is like calling something 'big'. 'Bigness' is not an objective part of an object. I can deny that something is big without contradiction (it might appear small from a far distance, or small to another animal/alien/whatever)
Dn read
 
Not a letter

Rent free

Keep crying for me

You spent half of this thread talking about me. Not only did my honest words hurt you, they completely destroyed you, there is not much left for your rebuttal but parroting the same phrases over and over again.

Again i feel not an ounce of hatred against you but pure pity. I wish you all the best, i truly do! But not even the greatest minds can reanimate that what has been without life.
 
You've basically just admitted I'm right. How pathetic.
No because Im not gonna argue against someone who thinks you can’t rate a persons general looks

And that and deformed Down syndrome 1 can be a 10 yo as much people as Gandy
You spent half of this thread talking about me. Not only did my honest words hurt you, they completely destroyed you, there is not much left for your rebuttal but parroting the same phrases over and over again.

Again i feel not an ounce of hatred against you but pure pity. I wish you all the best, i truly do! But not even the greatest minds can reanimate that what has been without life.
Not a pixel.

Keep crying for me.
 
No because Im not gonna argue against someone who thinks you can’t rate a persons general looks

And that and deformed Down syndrome 1 can be a 10 yo as much people as Gandy

Not a pixel.

Keep crying for me.
You can rate someone for sure. All I'm saying is that it's not objective.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Griffith
You can rate someone for sure. All I'm saying is that it's not objective.

Don't mind him, i am largely at fault for the regression of his feeble mind.
 
Don't mind him, i am largely at fault for the regression of his feeble mind.
Who are you, you’re irrelevant

Keep it rent free
 
  • +1
Reactions: Griffith
That's in the normal sense of the word. Philosophy gives it a different meaning. We are talking about beauty, which concerns the philosophical study of Aesthetics, so we should therefore use the philosophical sense of the world objective

Many philosophers would use the term “objective reality” to refer to anything that exists as it is independent of any conscious awareness of it (via perception, thought, etc.)

An object can't have beauty without a perciever. It can have shape, size, quantity - but not beauty. In order for something to be beautiful it must need a perceiver. This therefore makes it subjective.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Griffith
Not even a proton
Not even a Nanoparticle
That's in the normal sense of the word. Philosophy gives it a different meaning. We are talking about beauty, which concerns the philosophical study of Aesthetics, so we should therefore use the philosophical sense of the world objective

Many philosophers would use the term “objective reality” to refer to anything that exists as it is independent of any conscious awareness of it (via perception, thought, etc.)

An object can't have beauty without a perciever. It can have shape, size, quantity - but not beauty. In order for something to be beautiful it must need a perceiver. This therefore makes it subjective.
Stop the unnecessary cope.
 
psl scale is retarded, i dont use it nowawadays.

To me, youre either deformed, ugly, below av, av, above av, good looking, model tier
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 1100
i only rate objectively
 
Well, you have gigachad, chad, chadlite, high tier normie, normie, ugly/below averge, ligthly deformed, deformed. If you count those its 8. I think thats it.
 
  • +1
Reactions: HighIQcel
Brutal wanna be special community pill
 

Similar threads

I
Replies
19
Views
876
Restitutor Orbis
Restitutor Orbis
dstivvy
Replies
5
Views
449
dstivvy
dstivvy
eternalcoper
Replies
15
Views
719
eternalcoper
eternalcoper
6ft4
Replies
18
Views
913
lowpsl
L
theonewhorisesabove
Replies
16
Views
411
Docc
Docc

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top