Rate My Face Kind Sirs

[WanderingBurro]

Sorry man, but you'll never be good looking. There isn't one surgery that'll ascend you. If you do okay socially then you're obviously NT enough to be a functioning member of society. Roll with that

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

View attachment 1858162She has really bad features but is very beautiful

You sound like you're contradicting yourself but in a way I can see a slight truth though still a mostly dogwater reply

One has to know that not all bad features are equal. Some bad features are fixable (e.g. recessed jaw or nasal base, UEE), some aren't too much of a failo on their own (slightly elonagted midface, NCT eyes), and some features are what some users would call a "death sentence"

You'll see people labelled good looking who have slightly drooped eyes or a longer matured face but you'll never see one that lacks forward growth as forward growth is quintessential for anything considered attractive whether most people realise it or not

I’m not going to do the work for you. Add all of new premises to your argument. Here I’ll help you out.

All people with bad facial features are ugly
( add your premises from your new post)
Archaic alchemist has bad facial features
Therefore archaic alchemist is ugly.

The conclusion still remains the same. You just don’t like the truth in this argument so you’d rather disagree with it.

Take out a pencil and paper and write out your argument. Post in this thread. And I’ll check it to see if you’re reasoning is even valid. Have a good day kind sir. Next

 

[khvirgin]

I’m not going to do the work for you. Add all of new premises to your argument. Here I’ll help you out.

All people with bad facial features are ugly
( add your premises from your new post)
Archaic alchemist has bad facial features
Therefore archaic alchemist is ugly.

The conclusion still remains the same. You just don’t like the truth in this argument so you’d rather disagree with it.

Take out a pencil and paper and write out your argument. Post in this thread. And I’ll check it to see if you’re reasoning is even valid. Have a good day kind sir. Next

hey man how is your dating life going?
any recent success?

 

[WanderingBurro]

I’m not going to do the work for you. Add all of new premises to your argument. Here I’ll help you out.

All people with bad facial features are ugly
( add your premises from your new post)
Archaic alchemist has bad facial features
Therefore archaic alchemist is ugly.

The conclusion still remains the same. You just don’t like the truth in this argument so you’d rather disagree with it.

Take out a pencil and paper and write out your argument. Post in this thread. And I’ll check it to see if you’re reasoning is even valid. Have a good day kind sir. Next

You asked to be rated, I gave you a rating and a detailed response for why I came to that rating. You then said some people with bad features are attractive, I then agreed and explained the nuance for such, I also explained how you aren't one of those people


Your writing skills are nearly as low as your PSL score so it's hard to make out what you want. What am I missing here, seriously, what truth

 

[poopoohead]

You asked to be rated, I gave you a rating and a detailed response for why I came to that rating. You then said some people with bad features are attractive, I then agreed and explained the nuance for such, I also explained how you aren't one of those people


Your writing skills are nearly as low as your PSL score so it's hard to make out what you want. What am I missing here, seriously, what truth

He’s just some dude who read some philosophy and thinks he’s god. Let him be and not gain anything from this website as he does not deserve the knowledge. Btw this website is not used for “personality” @ArchaicAlchemist22 its used for facial aesthetics. Now go fuck some of your 7s and 8s with your looks

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

He’s just some dude who read some philosophy and thinks he’s god. Let him be and not gain anything from this website as he does not deserve the knowledge. Btw this website is not used for “personality” @ArchaicAlchemist22 its used for facial aesthetics. Now go fuck some of your 7s and 8s with your looks

Not replying. Indexed comment. Falls under other previous commenters. Garbage. Next.

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

You asked to be rated, I gave you a rating and a detailed response for why I came to that rating. You then said some people with bad features are attractive, I then agreed and explained the nuance for such, I also explained how you aren't one of those people


Your writing skills are nearly as low as your PSL score so it's hard to make out what you want. What am I missing here, seriously, what truth

I will return to this another day. Discussion and argument ceased. If any more of my opponent post today I will get back to you another day. Have a good day kind sirs. And remember make up your own mind. Don’t be a slave to others conclusions and reasonings.

 

[Deleted member 21182]

Pray eyes, bad eyebrows, big forehead, long horse face, shit nose, no face bones= 2.5/10 no joke maybe if ur tall u can get some land while to be with u but idk how u can improve

View attachment 1592904
I’ve been always told I’m not ugly but I’m not attractive either. I’m guessing I’m a 5/10? Btw sorry this is one of the best pictures I have of Me. So could you guys rate me please?

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

Pray eyes, bad eyebrows, big forehead, long horse face, shit nose, no face bones= 2.5/10 no joke maybe if ur tall u can get some land while to be with u but idk how u can improve

Another opponent, I’ll get this one over with quickly.

If a person has bad facial features you can’t improve
Archaic alchemist has bad facial features
Therefore it’s likely he can’t improve.

The reasoning is horrible. You should think before you speak.

 

[Deleted member 16673]

it's been 29 pages and this man still has not accepted that it's over

 

[Deleted member 21182]

Another opponent, I’ll get this one over with quickly.

If a person has bad facial features you can’t improve
Archaic alchemist has bad facial features
Therefore it’s likely he can’t improve.

The reasoning is horrible. You should think before you speak.

Anything you do will increase almost nothing on your PSL you're in that spot where even surgery is useless and will make you look like a deformed ken doll if you do a lot

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

it's been 29 pages and this man still has not accepted that it's over

I’m going to enlighten you. to knowledge you don’t possess. Hopefully this knowledge can come into to your possession.

Deductive arguments give true certainty. Inductive arguments give strong probability.

The sun will rise tomorrow because it’s risen everyday is a damn strong inductive argument.

Criminals can’t vote in Ohio and John is a criminal so he can’t vote while in Ohio is a damn true certain argument.

Now that you understand the distinctions I will give you an example.

woman pick attractive partners. Ugly men are less likely to be picked by woman. Since their not attractive; thereforeUgly people have no chance of ever getting a woman.

No matter how strong you make this argument, it will never give true certainty.

The sun may not rise tomorrow either.

In either case I hope we have learned something from this. Good day kind sir.

 

[Deleted member 16673]

I’m going to enlighten you. to knowledge you don’t possess. Hopefully this knowledge can come into to your possession.

Deductive arguments give true certainty. Inductive arguments give strong probability.

The sun will rise tomorrow because it’s risen everyday is a damn strong inductive argument.

Criminals can’t vote in Ohio and John is a criminal so he can’t vote while in Ohio is a damn true certain argument.

Now that you understand the distinctions I will give you an example.

woman pick attractive partners. Ugly men are less likely to be picked by woman. Since their not attractive; thereforeUgly people have no chance of ever getting a woman.

No matter how strong you make this argument, it will never give true certainty.

The sun may not rise tomorrow either.

In either case I hope we have learned something from this. Good day kind sir.

yeah okay good day dawg

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

Anything you do will increase almost nothing on your PSL you're in that spot where even surgery is useless and will make you look like a deformed ken doll if you do a lot

I advise you to read the above post. The sun may not rise tomorrow should be everyone’s new response to the argument “ it’s over”’

 

[Deleted member 1851]

Another opponent, I’ll get this one over with quickly.

If a person has bad facial features you can’t improve
Archaic alchemist has bad facial features
Therefore it’s likely he can’t improve.

The reasoning is horrible. You should think before you speak.

you are legit dumb, 80 iq type of guy lol.

 

[Deleted member 18244]

I love that people are commenting even though OP has literally said HE IS NOT INTERESTED IN LOOKSMAXXING

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

you are legit dumb, 80 iq type of guy lol.

The sun my not rise tomorrow is the new argument. Not interested indexed comment*

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

“ It’s over” is an infinite regress. I hope this knowledge reaches someone.

 

[Deleted member 16673]

110 iq larping as 140iq

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

110 iq larping as 140iq

*indexed as comments that are under insults. Next, argument.

 

[WanderingBurro]

I’m going to enlighten you. to knowledge you don’t possess. Hopefully this knowledge can come into to your possession.

Deductive arguments give true certainty. Inductive arguments give strong probability.

The sun will rise tomorrow because it’s risen everyday is a damn strong inductive argument.

Criminals can’t vote in Ohio and John is a criminal so he can’t vote while in Ohio is a damn true certain argument.

Now that you understand the distinctions I will give you an example.

woman pick attractive partners. Ugly men are less likely to be picked by woman. Since their not attractive; thereforeUgly people have no chance of ever getting a woman.

No matter how strong you make this argument, it will never give true certainty.

The sun may not rise tomorrow either.

In either case I hope we have learned something from this. Good day kind sir.

Expecting a "true certain argument" is a failure to understand the blackpill as no one argues in absolutes. No one is going to say that your chances for any success are 0, and through following Iasacrko's advice you might be able to nudge your chances a bit higher provided you're not short

But facially alone you are objectively unattractive, it is not going to do anything for you. If anything it'll hinder your preformance in comparison to those around you but again, not make it 0

You were already the ugliest person I've rated here, I guess now the dumbest too?

 

[fruitgunpop]

Dayum this thread is still going strong.

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

Expecting a "true certain argument" is a failure to understand the blackpill as no one argues in absolutes. No one is going to say that your chances for any success are 0, and through following Iasacrko's advice you might be able to nudge your chances a bit higher provided you're not short

But facially alone you are objectively unattractive, it is not going to do anything for you. If anything it'll hinder your preformance in comparison to those around you but again, not make it 0

You were already the ugliest person I've rated here, I guess now the dumbest too?

I’ll answer these objections as quickly as possible.

You need to understand the distinctions between philosophy and science.

Philosophy tries to answer why.
Science tries to answers how.

This entire threads purpose the authors purpose ( my purpose isint a how question) I’m not asking anyone here to explain how I look. Im looking for someone to explain why they gave me the rating they did.

“ Rate” means to judge not to examine and explain. Once you understand that this is a philosophical thread. You will cease to bring up science to try and win arguments.

 

[Deleted member 18244]

Over

 

[Deleted member 18244]

Fr if you comment here it’s over for your iq

 

[Deleted member 21182]

Poor guy is going through the denial phase it's always hard when you gotta realize you're below avarage and there's little you can do to improve since you're always gonna be a 2psl maybe if you do everything in the book a 3

I’ll answer these objections as quickly as possible.

You need to understand the distinctions between philosophy and science.

Philosophy tries to answer why.
Science tries to answers how.

This entire threads purpose the authors purpose ( my purpose isint a how question) I’m not asking anyone here to explain how I look. Im looking for someone to explain why they gave me the rating they did.

“ Rate” means to judge not to examine and explain. Once you understand that this is a philosophical thread. You will cease to bring up science to try and win argumenTis

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

Over

The sun may not rise tomorrow.

 

[WanderingBurro]

I’ll answer these objections as quickly as possible.

You need to understand the distinctions between philosophy and science.

Philosophy tries to answer why.
Science tries to answers how.

This entire threads purpose the authors purpose ( my purpose isint a how question) I’m not asking anyone here to explain how I look. Im looking for someone to explain why they gave me the rating they did.

“ Rate” means to judge not to examine and explain. Once you understand that this is a philosophical thread. You will cease to bring up science to try and win arguments.

PSL is one of the most objective forms of rating facial aesthetics, it's not some vague philosophy. Beauty while not absolute is not nearly as subjective as some make it out to be (notice how all of our ratings fall around the 2.5-3 range? if it was subjective and entirely philosophical then our ratings would be more varied), there are plenty of studies that detail an objectively good looking face and how people who fit said good looking criteria are more likely to be perceived as good looking and be treated more positively by society. There is science behind it jfl

I and others have also already explained to you why you received the ratings we gave you. You literally have no redeeming features, everything about you is recessed in some way or badly shaped. 3 is the lowest you can get without having a deformity which you clearly don't have

This argument isn't philosophical because you say it is. You asked for a rating and we gave you one that was farely objective

 

[WanderingBurro]

Poor guy is going through the denial phase it's always hard when you gotta realize you're below avarage and there's little you can do to improve since you're always gonna be a 2psl maybe if you do everything in the book a 3

Yeah, idk how I'd cope as a true 3 tbh. I guess I can at least give OP props for dancing so much around the truth. Ignorance is sometimes bliss as they say I guess

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

your objections will get answered as quickly as possible. Next opponent.

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

M

PSL is one of the most objective forms of rating facial aesthetics, it's not some vague philosophy. Beauty while not absolute is not nearly as subjective as some make it out to be (notice how all of our ratings fall around the 2.5-3 range? if it was subjective and entirely philosophical then our ratings would be more varied), there are plenty of studies that detail an objectively good looking face and how people who fit said good looking criteria are more likely to be perceived as good looking and be treated more positively by society. There is science behind it jfl

I and others have also already explained to you why you received the ratings we gave you. You literally have no redeeming features, everything about you is recessed in some way or badly shaped. 3 is the lowest you can get without having a deformity which you clearly don't have

This argument isn't philosophical because you say it is. You asked for a rating and we gave you one that was farely objective

No this argument is philosophical because I proved it is.

 

[WanderingBurro]

M

No this argument is philosophical because I proved it is.

We proved otherwise, now prove us wrong

Philosophy tries to answer why.
Science tries to answers how.

We explained both why and how we came to your rating proving it is not entirely philosophical. If you feel otherwise you're free to explain

 

[daqirius]

Dayum this thread is still going strong.

just like yo mama JFL

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

your objections will be answered as quickly as possible.

When you read something you classify it. You have to know what you’re reading. If this thread were a book, it would be an expository. It has opinions theories and hypothesis. So this thread can be classified as a non-fiction expository. Expository threads or books convey information. Now onto a narrow classification. We have an expository thread. We have history, philosophy, science and mathematics. That’s it. So far we’ve discovered this thread is non-fiction, and an expository and it may be a history, philosophy, science, or mathematics type thread. Also, we need to know rather it’s practical thread or theoretical thread. This thread is practical, im not looking to discuss theory of looks. So far we have a practical, non-fiction, expository thread. Now on to the main question. This is not a thread of history. Now we have mathematics science and philosophy. This thread is not mathematical in any way. It’s subject matter isn't an equation of any kind. So now we have science and mathematics. I’m seeking general truths about reality. There is no laboratory needed for any of the questions I’ve asked. It’s simply a philosophical matter. All you need to do answer this thread is look at me and use your experience as a human and tell me how I look. This is philosophy. There is no laboratory required for this. Therefore; this is a philosophical thread and more specifically; a non-fiction, practical philosophical book.

The truth has been found. If you reply again, and you disagree then we will start over.

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

We proved otherwise, now prove us wrong



We explained both why and how we came to your rating proving it is not entirely philosophical. If you feel otherwise you're free to explain

your objections will be answered as quickly as possible.

When you read something you classify it. You have to know what you’re reading. If this thread were a book, it would be an expository. It has opinions theories and hypothesis. So this thread can be classified as a non-fiction expository. Expository threads or books convey information. Now onto a narrow classification. We have an expository thread. We have history, philosophy, science and mathematics. That’s it. So far we’ve discovered this thread is non-fiction, and an expository and it may be a history, philosophy, science, or mathematics type thread. Also, we need to know rather it’s practical thread or theoretical thread. This thread is practical, im not looking to discuss theory of looks. So far we have a practical, non-fiction, expository thread. Now on to the main question. This is not a thread of history. Now we have mathematics science and philosophy. This thread is not mathematical in any way. It’s subject matter isn't an equation of any kind. So now we have science and mathematics. I’m seeking general truths about reality. There is no laboratory needed for any of the questions I’ve asked. It’s simply a philosophical matter. All you need to do answer this thread is look at me and use your experience as a human and tell me how I look. This is philosophy. There is no laboratory required for this. Therefore; this is a philosophical thread and more specifically; a non-fiction, practical philosophical book.

The truth has been found. If you reply again, and you disagree then we will start over.

My reply.

 

[Deleted member 19174]

Man, how tf is thread still going?!

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

We proved otherwise, now prove us wrong



We explained both why and how we came to your rating proving it is not entirely philosophical. If you feel otherwise you're free to explain

I’m asking How do I look, and what can I do about it. ( philosophy)

Not why do I look this way and why is this the case ( science)

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

Man, how tf is thread still going?!

This thread is still going because of sophist.

 

[WanderingBurro]

My reply.

im not looking to discuss theory of looks

You come to a site that autistically examines and analyses the human face and expected otherwise? If you wanted a 4-6 and pats on the back why didn't you go to reddit. A 4 is generous, most people on this board agree that you're a 2-3

Want a scientific response? Here have what's scientifically considered to be an ideal face

Science pins down the ideals of male and female beauty

A new study has used facial mapping technology to compose what is perceived to be the ideal representation of European beauty.

businesstech.co.za

Want a mathematical response? Here have a bunch of ratios and find out you don't match any of them

Ideal facial ratios and proportions

this is an updated version of my previous ideal facial ratios & proportions thread which can be found here facial width to height ratio (FWHR): 1.8+ measured by dividing the bizygomatic width (distance from cheekbone to cheekbone) by the height of the middle part of the eyebrow to the upper...

looksmax.org

Want a historical response? You said you preform fine IRL so clearly you're riding well enough off a media halo and an outgoing personality along with whatever life style you seem to be leading

Want a philospohical response? You're objectively ugly, ugly = unattractive, you admitted yourself you're not attractive, not attract = unattractive



Truth is, you're ugly. I'd rather be reborn as a street shitter than you

 

[WanderingBurro]

I’m asking How do I look, and what can I do about it. ( philosophy)

Not why do I look this way and why is this the case ( science)

Okay then here are your answers

How do I look: ugly, true 3PSL, 2-3/10

What can I do about it: nothing, your flaws are untreatable. Your skull is too malformed overall. If your base is broken then there's nothing one can do

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

You come to a site that autistically examines and analyses the human face and expected otherwise? If you wanted a 4-6 and pats on the back why didn't you go to reddit. A 4 is generous, most people on this board agree that you're a 2-3

Want a scientific response? Here have what's scientifically considered to be an ideal face

Science pins down the ideals of male and female beauty

A new study has used facial mapping technology to compose what is perceived to be the ideal representation of European beauty.

businesstech.co.za

Want a mathematical response? Here have a bunch of ratios and find out you don't match any of them

Ideal facial ratios and proportions

this is an updated version of my previous ideal facial ratios & proportions thread which can be found here facial width to height ratio (FWHR): 1.8+ measured by dividing the bizygomatic width (distance from cheekbone to cheekbone) by the height of the middle part of the eyebrow to the upper...

looksmax.org

Want a historical response? You said you preform fine IRL so clearly you're riding well enough off a media halo and an outgoing personality along with whatever life style you seem to be leading

Want a philospohical response? You're objectively ugly, ugly = unattractive, you admitted yourself you're not attractive, not attract = unattractive



Truth is, you're ugly. I'd rather be reborn as a street shitter than you

No reply,

Okay then here are your answers

How do I look: ugly, true 3PSL, 2-3/10

What can I do about it: nothing, your flaws are untreatable. Your skull is too malformed overall. If your base is broken then there's nothing one can do

this argument has already been solved above us. NEXT fucking victim.

 

[WanderingBurro]

No reply,

this argument has already been solved above us. NEXT fucking victim.

I made the last move, you said it's solved with no reply. I guess that means I won

 

[DragonBallZCel]

Okay then here are your answers

How do I look: ugly, true 3PSL, 2-3/10

What can I do about it: nothing, your flaws are untreatable. Your skull is too malformed overall. If your base is broken then there's nothing one can do

Hey bro can you rate me in dms im also black

 

[WanderingBurro]

Hey bro can you rate me in dms im also black

Yeah feel free to shoot

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

I made the last move, you said it's solved with no reply. I guess that means I won

Arguements are about the meeting of minds for the sake of truth. The truth is the only thing that matters. Having an argument for the sake of winning is pointless. Disagreeing without understanding is also pointless. Agreeing without understanding is to be a slave. The positions that you can exhaust arguing are I disagree, I agree. Or I suspend judgement. I suspend my judgement; I hold the same position I did as I did before we argued. Therefore; I am not persuaded by you. Therefore your argument failed in persuading me. However I’ve actually won because I’ve exposed the truth. However; I may or may not have persuaded you. Regardless; my goal was not to win. It was to get to the truth. That I did. That’s why I won. Therefore; argue to find the truth, or remain a sophist. A sophist is a person who uses illogical reasoning to present wrongness as it were truth.i hope this message reaches you.

 

[WanderingBurro]

Arguements are about the meeting of minds for the sake of truth. The truth is the only thing that matters. Having an argument for the sake of winning is pointless. Disagreeing without understanding is also pointless. Agreeing without understanding is to be a slave. The positions that you can exhaust arguing are I disagree, I agree. Or I suspend judgement. I suspend my judgement; I hold the same position I did as I did before we argued. Therefore; I am not persuaded by you. Therefore your argument failed in persuading me. However I’ve actually won because I’ve exposed the truth. However; I may or may not have persuaded you. Regardless; my goal was not to win. It was to get to the truth. That I did. That’s why I won. Therefore; argue to find the truth, or remain a sophist. A sophist is a person who uses illogical reasoning to present wrongness as it were truth.i hope this message reaches you.

Yeah I can't persuade you because you came here delusional enough to think you were anything above a 3


I sure wonder what the truth is to a philosophical argument, it's so cool you found the truth behind something you stated yourself to be subjective with no absolutes. I guess having such a big malformed peanut head didn't grant you any extra IQ. Reading rules without ever making a point isn't winning

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

Yeah I can't persuade you because you came here delusional enough to think you were anything above a 3


I sure wonder what the truth is to a philosophical argument, it's so cool you found the truth behind something you stated yourself to be subjective with no absolutes. I guess having such a big malformed peanut head didn't grant you any extra IQ. Reading rules without ever making a point isn't winning

Two truths can objectively clash. For instance, I believe I’m a 4-5 and even a 6 to some people. I also know that average below average. These are two truths. Philosophy goes deeper than these two truths. Also, your truth is a all the statements which you said, but I disagree with it. This is philosophy once again.

 

[WanderingBurro]

Two truths can objectively clash. For instance, I believe I’m a 4-5 and even a 6 to some people. I also know that average below average. These are two truths. Philosophy goes deeper than these two truths. Also, your truth is a all the statements which you said, but I disagree with it. This is philosophy once again.

Two truths cannot clash nor can one be disagreed with, those go against the definition of a truth

A truth can only be ignored or disproven, and if disproven it is no longer a truth

Your audacity

 

[ArchaicAlchemist22]

Two truths cannot clash nor can one be disagreed with, those go against the definition of a truth

A truth can only be ignored or disproven, and if disproven it is no longer a truth

Your audacity

Two people can sit in a room. One can say it’s hot one can it’s cold. Two truths can clash.

 

[Max Frauder]

alright I’ll get this one over with as quick as I can.

All people with bad facial features are ugly.
Archaic alchemist Has bad facial features
Therefore; archaic alchemist is ugly.

People can have bad facial features and still be attractive and beautiful. The truth has been found. A simple syllogism beat a sophist. Listen kids. Don’t be a slave to someone else’s reasoning.

ArchaicAlchemist logic; people who are ugly can still be attractive and beautiful.

Geniuscope