Veeky Forums here

Have you considered channeling the drive to make yourself better physical into a mindset to better yourself mentally, to defeat those desires and to stop being a caveman?

Just make sure whatever path you take is not filled with spooks and you are golden

>Implying you can't be Veeky Forums and Veeky Forums.

The pen is mightier that the sword but the pen is nothing without a sword.

Spotted the neckbeard, go run a little fatty.

but that is exactly what i'm saying user?
i wasnt saying he needs to stop working out.

What would be a 'deeper' goal?
Is there really such thing as a deep goal? Assuming you're not a genius or a great philosophical mind

you can have both, i read a lot and fuck ugly girls

No its not.
He doesnt mean "thinking" in the typical sense of the word.

Disregard the insult but it sounded differently.

I am not a english native speaker tho.

But you still have to go run :^)

>sex is a basic need
Y-yeah I totally agree OP, hahaha..

I do cardio every day and lift every other day lmao, but thanks for the encouragement

I feel like obliviousness is not a choice for some. I come from a family with poor mental health, like 5 out of my 6 siblings are on antidepressants. Four of us have been to the pysch ward at some occation etc.

Anyways, for people like us, it's not really a choice to go for a hedonistic lifestile and be content with it. Myself included, I was miserable when I tried to be a normie.

I know this sounds edgy and fedora-y but most people don't really concern themselves with things that give them angst, they don't care for music or literature that doesn't make them feel good, they watch movies to be entertained etc.

I find meaning in life with art and long-term goals. For example, my goal is to be a great oncologist. I'm doing med right now, and feeling like I'm going somewhere that has some "inherent meaning" (even though it hasn't) gets me out of bed in the morning.

This got a bit more rambling than intended but I guess what I'm trying to say is some people don't need to feel shit about life and can enjoy a hedonistic lifestyle. I don't think deeper thinking leads to misery but I think misery leads to deeper thinking.

That's my two cents OP, make of that what you will.
P.s I'm from Veeky Forums, lifting weights and doing sports makes me feel better about life

>unironically "tfw to smart too lift"
can't make this shit up fampai

My problem has always been that the most hedonistic goals are always the most motivating

Like lately, my biggest goal has been to have a threesome with two hot blondes
Sounds stupid, but I find that simple goals like that drive me far more

Just look at what I've done so far

>Worked on myself, my style, my looks
>Increased my social circle greatly
>Blew out my comfort zone, can now approach women with almost no fear
>Learnt to play guitar

It's shallow I know, I'm "doing it all to get laid", but my life is also generally improving

Maybe Freud was right
Maybe sex is the true motivator of all we do

Why are you this insecure about lifting?

I disagree, learning about philosophy and literature is very rewarding if you don't approach it as a self-help thing. Don't go in expecting to understand it all or get an easy meaning of life out of it. Just go in with an honest desire to learn.

Treat it like lifting, set aside time for reading like you would for the gym. Make a schedule with realistic goals every day and stick at it. Like exercise, when you're just starting out there'll be moments you're sick of it and want a break. But building up your reading time little by little will make you better and allow yourself to enjoy it more.

I'm not at all insecure. Lifting, and any type of physical activity, is one of the best things you can do in your day-to-day-life. It improves your physical health, your mental health, your strength, your confidence and your looks.

To dismiss it as something "stupid and barbaric" is atrocious

Is this the infamous "Chad" that everyone talks about?

Not sure if that's where the phrase started, but his name is Chad, yeah

He was a top sports player in school, moved on to become a wealthy CEO

Got popular on the internet as the archetype "alpha male" that nerds fantasize so much about

Read the Bible and convert to Catholicism..

>All to go to parties, get drunk, fuck some blonde chick I'm not going to remember
I know this isn't true or real, but you wouldn't get any sympathy from us here, normie. fuck off

>dude worship idols and kid raping priests lmao
>all sermons must be in latin because we wouldn't want you to understand what we're saying, would we you filthy peasant
>priests having the power or authority to absolve people of sin
worst branch of Christianity desu

t. virgin by choice (not his own choice, though)

Why wouldn't it be true or real?

Not everyone on this site is a NEET shutin

ignore him, he got triggered because this isn't the safe space he thought it was.

>being THIS misinformed

Nice conjectures you've got there, faggot.

>worst branch of Christianity desu
True. Orthodox is the only respectable Christian branch. Protestants are basically heathens.

Enjoy your colon cancer and infertility when you're 40.

Philosophy is fun and rewarding once you understand ideas, which seemed cryptic at first. If philosophy is nothing for you, you could also try a natural science. The reason starting with the Greeks is useful, is because, almost all serious philosophers refer to them, and they give you a good basis to understand later works. The math which describes nature can be fun to decipher and understand. If neither works, you could always just try music or crafting.

You're already a virgin, no need to be bitter, as well.

>You can't support being chaste and restrained if you've had sex
Hedonists need to be killed.

Oh cry me a river, little wanker

Not an argument

Nothing to argue about. You defend restraint in things (sex, for one) where the restraint is not your choice.
Besides, you're acting like it's either celibacy (you/virgins/weak humans) or (what you perceive as) degeneracy, without anything in between and, conveniently the position you try to pass as virtuous is the one you're on.
You're good for no more than a laugh, the fedora who claims to know how all works, without ever actually leaving his basement.

Remember that he probably thinks the same as you right now. Something like:
You defend letting yourself loose in things (sex, for one) where it is nothing more than a psychological impulse and is not your choice.
Besides, you're acting like it's either strenuous restraint (me) or (what you perceive as) healthy activity, without anything in between and, conveniently the position you try to pass as healthy and active is the one you're on.
You're good for no more than a laugh, the fedora who claims to know how all works, without ever actually leaving his basement.

Remember that everyone speaks in hyperbole on the internet.

I know.
I just find it interesting that people justify as their absolute truths what I believe to be false and vice-versa.
It's so bizarre to me, opposite sides thinking they're clearly right and the other is clearly wrong.

It is easier to accept your conditions if all the other potential situations are worse. The virgin doesn't want to be a virgin (whether this is due to social pressure is not important) but doesn't have the power to overcome his condition of being a virgin. It becomes an issue of insecurity for the virgin. So he projects his insecurity upon those who aren't virgins. "Those filthy normies only have sex because they are insecure" declares the virgin. Due to how society works this rarely works the other way around. The opposite story is usually about people being disillusioned about sex being the greatest activity on earth. Which often infuriates virgins even more. Then again not all virgins yada yada... And then we, of course, have the "everything is degeneracy" people, who really just lack a proper understanding of alienation, cause and effect, and the effects of society on the human psyche. Which causes them to believe that removing certain aspects of modern society, is enough to change the creation of degenerate elements.

In general terms; If the person is insecure about the validity of his own position or point of view, it becomes his purpose, not the defend his own, but to eliminate the other points of view.

Wrong and gay.

Tell me where I am wrong. Then you could show me the light.

Wasn't me, I'm

>not being /litfit/
THE GREEKS

You'll never live in a city made entirely out of rock with your best bros, lifting, drinking, and discussing philosophy. While slaves do all the work.

Let me guess, you are smart because you think and others aren't because they don't?

This is a funny post.

Just discipline your mind like you discipline your body and you will be more actualized than most of the people on this board. If I tried too much to psychoanalze your behavior so far, I'd wager that a lot of these hedonistic goals of yours come from a fetishization of masculinity. I think emotional restraint and selective stoicism is your first goal. People on this board denigrate ideologies and the proponents of them as a dhogma, but you are obviously asking to find the virtues of a stoic in your life; to strike a balance between modest and self derived happiness and the fickle nature of immediate pleasures. Most short posts will sound too romantic "you need to find a balance", but the introspection you've already demonstrated seems like you already know what you're after and need someone who can make you understand it, and put it into practice. Read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius, it's super easy and short. Then come back for another recommendation with your thoughts on what you did and didn't like about it. It's kind of a meme book but you start with those here. Good luck

Veeky Forums is my boardfu desu, really liked the combination.

we're meant to be together lads,

You know you can just buy sex though?
All the shit you're doing is completely unnecessary.

Something like that is only relevant to the one fulfilling it. Can you think of something that you'd like to do that would deeply fulfill you?

This 2 be honest fampai.
I spent most of my late teen years into my early 20s on Veeky Forums before Veeky Forums became my main board. The combo was everything I strive to be and we had a great chemistry to boot. /litfit/ was a beautiful thing.

Veeky Forums triggers me

it's full of retards who are convinced they know everything about the human body

some idiot i was talking tried to convince me that genetics played no role in the weight of an individual
ironically he also thought scientists had identified every gene in the human genome

No. Im some kind of "pessimist". I dont believe happiness is possible at all. Happiness is the promise of happiness, the perspective of future fulfillment. In the end nothing completes you. Life is chasing shadows.

>Inb4 some kind of b8
Im aware of the cringy and edgy nature of this post, I dont give a fuck and wont answer b8, nonsense or ad hominems. Thank you

Well to be fair they do know a huge amount about the muscles and tendons of the human body and how they are used

Most people are infertile by 40 anyways (or have 50% chance of having a deformed autismo bebby)

>being really eager to argue that weight has to do with genetics

It's true that genetics play some part in weight, but don't give yourself too little credit for that obesity of yours ;)

Besides, the reason why Veeky Forums hate "muh genetics" is because that's what most obese whales genuinely use as the excuse for their obesity, and they use that excuse chronically when asked why they don't work out and eat better (pathetic defeatism and denial, basically).

>destroying innocent instruments that simply tells you the truth and nothing else
>lalalala I can't hear you MY FEELINGS

This is the type of people we're dealing with, people.

I have a BMI of 15 but I'm sure you're another Veeky Forums autist who thinks BMI has no credit since it doesn't apply to bodybuilders rofl

>autist who thinks BMI has no credit

Nope. Nice straw hat

BMI doesn't apply to any non sedantry person. If you work a physical job that can throw it out.

>chastity, restraint and piety

He wrote, obliviously, on Veeky Forums.

BMI is just a weight to height ratio. Or are you arguing that having muscle is obesity?

dont be retarded, you cant gain weight unless you eat more than you burn, thats it in a nutshell, there's outlying factors that affect weight, but none of them trumps calories in calories out for 99.999% of the population

But with the things he's doing, he has his cake and eats it too. His self, style, book, social circle, mettle, and skill with guitar are all his, and now his life is better and he can have sex more easily.

If you spend money on sex directly, it's spent - and all you get is the sex.

Most of the genetic play is in form hormone production or genetic dysfunctions. Where metabolic rate also could have an effect. It differs from person to person. What people don't understand is that your regular hunger response is based on blood sugar. So if you keep a diet based on if you feel hungry, there shouldn't be any issues, even with a slower metabolic rate. The problem forms when people with slower metabolisms start eating like fat fucks. It becomes harder for them to sate their hunger, so they eat more than they need which means they become fat easier. A secondary factor is your gut bacteria. How much the bacteria affect weight gain is pure speculation at this point.

all yet of those things can be covered by simply eating less and moving more

Yes, never implied otherwise. The solution is always the same. Just pointing out that there exist factors.

>eat less, move more
Google the Two Compartment Problem.

still doesn't trump calories in, calories out, im afraid, you cant make fat out of nothing

Yes, you can still starve to death. Yes, calories in calories out is still not an adequate description of metabolism.

What sources did you cover in your google search?

look i know its not a complete description of a metabolism, its just an easy catchphrase that encompasses some sound diet advice for someone who doesn't have the first clue and is looking for a place to start

You didn't look it up at all, did you? It's not even hard to understand, my five year old has drawn a crude diagram explaining it.

please, as if the two compartment analogy is a complete description

CICO causes bad outcomes because it's unfit for purpose; TC model directly avoids that misconception.

'Calories in, calories out' creates a major gap in metabolic understanding that significantly impacts fat loss efforts; 'two compartments' avoids that gap and doesn't create new ones.

Or can you name a significant hurdle that the Two Compartment model would pose for those honestly and rationally trying to lose fat or avoid fat gain? One that leads to worse outcomes.

CICO model is sound enough to inform decisions about diet and exercise for any rational person looking to change their body composition, you cannot pretend that there isn't significant overlap in the advice that comes from both models.

the spark notes of both are eat less move more, you cant get away from that no matter how hard you run, yes you can do if if you think its a huge improvement, but the jury is out on many of its supposed benefits

hilariously, your more complete model doesn't inform the most basic issue in weight loss, which is people treating it as a diet that they go on for a while, then go off once they reach their goal, going back to their old eating and exercising habits and going back to their old weight, why do you think 99% of all diets fail? because a diet is by design going to fail unless you keep at permanently, for a rational person trying to lose weight there is two things they are going to do, eat less, and move more, if you are pretending that the two compartment model includes making better choices about the types of food that people eat then you are sorely mistaken, and can you name a significant improvement for a rational person honestly trying to lose weight that the two compartment system provides over a calories in out model? one that leads to better outcomes? no you cant because they dont exist beyond contrived circumstances like the classic example, a fatty trying to lose weight by eating six carb heavy meals throughout the day, and getting upset because they counted out their calories and think they should be losing weight, as if that represents a rational person, and anyway, i hate this example because you know that the calories in out model says to do next? eat less! move more! who would have thought, it fixes 9/10 problems that beginners have and is easy to dole out

TC doesn't inform the psychology of dieting because it's a metabolic model, genius. The only way you can claim that TC doesn't better inform diet and exercise decisions compared to CICO is if you still haven't looked it up. It's the whole point and impetus of TC that it gives you the tools to avoid bad outcomes laid out by CICO.

Why would you prefer the strictly worse metabolic model?

Yo having looked this stuff up, the hilarious part is that calories in/calories out actually fails hardest because the harder you try to force the meme the worse the broken meme hurts your weight loss. Shit is fucking fascinating, honestly.

strictly less complicated =! worse

calories in and out gives you exactly what you need to get started, which is to eat less and move more, this is the foundation of any lifestyle change for an obese person, the thing is two compartments doesn't give you any different advice save for in fringe cases and contrived examples that have no bearing on what 99.999% of people should do

starvation mode is a meme that fat people who fail a diet parrot as if it excuses their lack of self control

Starvation mode is specifically a broken meme debunked by TC.

You still literally have not bothered to look it up: the Two Compartment Problem. I'm fucking amazed. What are you so afraid of?

At least look it up so that you can try and refute it properly. Or even state what it is.

are you just looking for an argument or something? that wasn't even your post, and starvation mode is clearly what the other guy was referring to, this idea that your body will cling to any fat you have no matter how harshly you restrict caloric intake

you can tell me all about how it's an insufficient model for a metabolism, but frankly that doesn't change the method that just about anyone can use to lose weight, eat less, move more

i actually have read rather a lot about metabolism, and the eagle eyed observer might have noticed that i mentioned fasting in an earlier post here but you were too busy casting aspersions on my character, so unless you can give me an actual rebuttal to my point here then i think we're done

I know, I've done it before, but it's never the same satisfaction

I need to have a girl LIKE me as well as fuck me, that's the thing
No matter how much an escort pretends, you know she's just doing it for the money, not for you

More the idea that increasing your exercise and decreasing your caloric intake alone just isn't as effective compared to also reducing the frequency of a less harshly restricted caloric intake.

Why would you want to long-term decrease your RMR and thereby your comfortable caloric output aka energy level? Why trigger cumulative hunger pangs and insulin spikes multiple times a day without a chance to let them drop off?

Don't buy the idea that knowledge and understanding necessarily lead to misery. Following my curiosities, acquiring culture and learning about the world, has given my life more meaning and joy than any physical pleasure. The more deeply and broadly you learn, the larger the world begins to seem, and the more mysterious. Don't give up sex and socializing, but make more time for reading and reflection. Start with whatever interests you most and work your way outward from there. All the best.

Hey lit, Veeky Forumsizen here. I want you to know i bought a kindle today. Were all gunna make it brahs.

...

Personally I'd go a blonde and a brunette, variety is the spice and all.
But that's never going to happen, so fuck it.