Thread replies: 9
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
Anonymous
A thought experiment 2016-08-20 16:33:05 Post No. 17479862
[Report] Image search: [Google]
A thought experiment 2016-08-20 16:33:05 Post No. 17479862
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Consider this:
Assume you're able to quantify how well you match (as in attracted to each other because of interests, looks or else) with people in some unit, say percentages. What would be the lowest number at which you can promise to stay in a monogamous relationship with that person for the rest of your life?
Anything above 50% would be a good number, right? It's better than average (we assume attraction and repulsion are different things). But why would you settle for 50%? Surely you can do better than that. If you'd start working out, learn to socialize with people and so on and so forth, you should be able to increase that number by, say 25%.
Would 75% be enough for you? You've now managed to find a soulmate in the subjective top quarter percentile of people around the world. However, what happens if you find a 90%:er in the middle of your life? You've already committed to one person and now you have to live with the regret of being too greedy early on in life.
So tell me, anon, what is your number?
>>
>>17479862
Now, consider this:
Assume you've found a person, and decided to commit to him/her/it for the rest of your life.
Is it be possible to increase this number defining how well you match with each other? If so, by how much? Is it possible to get to 100% even while starting out at say 60%?
>>
Does your match number include traits which may appear to be negative but contain some value or fulfill some hidden need in your psychology? For instance, if a person is argumentative, contrarian, or holds some opinion you don't like or has some behavior that irritates you, but serves to challenge you, broaden your mindset, increase your empathy, fulfill a need for conflict or keep the relationship more dynamic and interesting?
>>
>>17479906
I'd say It's irrelevant. Since attraction is a product of how I value the traits you mentioned.
If I am _only_ attracted by looks, and the love of my life is as well, we could fight all we want and still be each others 100%:ers, since we don't care about any emotional connection at all.
The traits which appear to be negative, in fact leaves the number unchanged in this case.
>>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_problem
>>
>>17479862
Like stats in a video game? Should I also raise my speech level to bargain with Khajjit?
>>
>>17479943
>he doesn't follow around hundreds of women keeping dossiers on each of them
>>
>>17479862
>make tinder bot
>set infinite max distance
>use face recognition to filter good aesthetics
>use language processing to filter good emotional traits
>automatically swipe right if 100% match
give me 1 reason why this wouldnt work
>>
>>17479993
Facial recognition is terrible at finding how attractive you are. All it really looks for is symmetry in most cases.
Also, pretty much everyone uses positive words when using those apps. A common redflag for girls is that they use Tinder at all.
Thread posts: 9
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2