Class materials for January 15, 2012

Okay, here is the link for the materials this week. Leave a note in the comments if there's any problem.

As usual, there's another copy below the jump (click where it says 'czytaj więcej).

See you all on Sunday!




 Fourth dimension:
UNCERTAINTY AVOIDANCE

Human beings all have to face the fact that they do not know what will happen tomorrow. The future is uncertain but people have to live with it anyway.
Extreme uncertainty creates intolerable anxiety. This is why important roles of every culture are played by technology, law and religion. Technology from the simplest to the most complicated helps to avoid uncertainties caused by nature while laws and rules are meant to prevent uncertain behavior in other people. Religion helps people to accept the uncertainties that one cannot defend oneself against, including death.
The experience of uncertainty is essentially subjective. A herpetologist may feel reasonably comfortable while handling rattlesnakes, a situation that would make most people almost die from fear. On the other hand, many people feel comfortable in a car on a crowded highway traveling at 120 kmp, a situation that is probably statistically more risky than that of the herpetologist.
Feelings of uncertainly are not only personal but may also be shared with other members of society. Feelings of uncertainty are acquired, transferred and reinforced through basic institutions like the family, school and state. They are reflected in the collectively held values of the members of a particular society and their roots are non-rational. This can also lead to collective patterns of behavior that may seem puzzling or even aberrant and incomprehensible to members of other societies.
Uncertainty avoidance then can be defined as: the extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by uncertain or unknown situations. This is expressed through levels of nervous stress and in a need for predictability, a need for written and unwritten rules.
In weak uncertainty avoidance countries anxiety levels are low. More people die from coronary heart disease which can be explained by the lower expressiveness of these cultures. Aggression and emotions are not supposed to be shown and people who behave emotionally or noisily are socially disapproved of. This means that stress cannot be released but must be internalized. If this happens again and again it can cause cardio-vascular damage. Alcohol use tends to be sporadic and often allows users to express themselves emotionally.
People from countries with weak uncertainty avoidance give the impression of being quiet, easy going, indolent and self-controlled.


There is a larger number of chronic psychosis patients in low anxiety countries from a lack of mental stimulus in such societies, a certain gloom or dullness. Coffee and tea are stimulating drugs and weak uncertainty avoidance cultures show a high consumption of such caffeine carriers.
People in more anxious cultures tend to be more expressive. They may talk with their hands and it is socially acceptable to raise one's voice, to show emotion and to pound the table. Alcohol releases stress and strong uncertainty avoidance cultures tend to have higher levels of alcohol consumption.
In countries with strong uncertainty avoidance, people come across as busy, fidgety, emotional, aggressive and active.
Japan may seem to be an exception. Japanese generally behave unemotionally in Western eyes. But there is an outlet of getting drunk with colleagues after working hours. During such parties men may release their pent up aggression, even toward superiors. But the next day business continues as usual. Such drinking bouts represent a major institutionalized form of anxiety release.
Uncertainty avoidance should not be confused with risk avoidance. Uncertainty is to risk as anxiety is to fear. Fear and risk are both focused on something specific while anxiety and uncertainty are both diffuse with no real object. As soon as uncertainty is expressed as risk, it ceases to be a source of anxiety. It may become a source of fear or it may be accepted as routine. Strong uncertainty avoidance correlates strongly with faster driving, which is riskier. But it is a familiar risk and that most people in the culture do mind running.
Rather than reducing risk, uncertainty avoidance leads to a reduction of ambiguity and unpredictability.  People in strong uncertainty avoidance cultures look for structure in institutions, organizations and relationships that make events clearly interpretable and predictable.

Uncertainty avoidance in the family
Among the first things a child learns are the distinctions between clean and safe and dirty and dangerous. But what is considered dirty is a relative concept that depends on cultural interpretation. Definitions of dirt and cleanliness vary not only between families within a given society but across societies as well. One definition of dirt is that it is "matter out of place" that does not fit within the normal classification. Ideas can also be regarded as good or taboo.


Weak uncertainty avoidance cultures have broad classifications about dirt and there is a willingness to give the benefit of a doubt to unknown situations, people and ideas. Norms are expressed basic terms like being kind, honest or polite. But there is a wide range of personal interpretation as to what this means in any given case. Deviant behavior is not necessarily felt to be threatening. Norms as to dress, hairstyle and speech are loose and children are expected to treat everybody the same way, regardless of the impression they may create. There is a fundamental curiosity about new ideas and situations. What's different is interesting.
In strong uncertainty avoidance cultures, the distinction between good and evil is very sharp. There is concern about Truth and ideas that differ from this Truth are dangerous and polluting with little room left for doubt or relativism. What is different is dangerous.
If children in a family are taught that other people are dangerous this can turn against the family itself. In one European values study, personal feelings about one's real (and not idealized) family relationships were more frequently negative in strong than in weak uncertainty avoidance cultures.

Uncertainty avoidance in school
In weak uncertainty avoidance cultures there is a preference for less structure in the school setting.
There is appreciation of open-ended learning situations with vague objectives and loose timetables. The suggestion that there could only be one right answer is taboo. Students expect to be rewarded for originality.
At basic teaching levels, there are more attempts to actively involve parents with their children's education and parents' ideas may be actively sought.
Students accept teachers who say "I don't know" and respect teachers who use plain language and books that explain difficult concepts in plain language that everyone can understand. Intellectual disagreement is seen as a stimulating exercise and teachers often welcome divergent views from students.
Students in strong uncertainty avoidance cultures prefer structured learning situations with precise objectives and strict timetables. They like situations in which there is one correct answer, which they can find using techniques they have been previously taught. They expect to be rewarded for accuracy.


At lower levels of education parents are occasionally summoned to meetings with or between teachers but are treated as an audience. Teachers are experts who know what's best for a child's development and parents aren't.
Students expect teachers to be experts who have all the answers and do not appreciate "I don't know" as an answer. Teachers who use difficult academic language are respected. There is an idea that anything that is easily understood is dubious and probably not scientific. At advanced levels, a graduate student who finds themself in conflict with their advisor has the choice of changing their mind, pretending to or finding another advisor. Academic disagreement is seen as personal disloyalty.

Uncertainty avoidance at work
In countries with weak uncertainty avoidance there is a kind of emotional distaste for formal rules which are only established in case of necessity. People in such societies pride themselves that many problems can be solved without formal rules. The paradox is that although rules in weak uncertainty avoidance countries are less sacred, they are generally more respected.
Weak uncertainty avoidance cultures are more likely to stimulate basic innovations as they maintain a greater tolerance for unconventional ideas. On the other hand, they are often at a disadvantage in developing their innovations towards implementation. These are tasks that require high levels precision and punctuality.
The emotional need for laws and rules in a strong uncertainty avoidance society often leads to the establishment of rules or rule-oriented behaviors that are clearly nonsensical, inconsistent or dysfunctional. But even ineffective rules satisfy people's emotional desire for formal structure. What happens in reality is less important.
Innovation in ideas is rare, but under the right conditions, strong uncertainty avoidance cultures are often better at implementing innovative ideas.


The New Dating Game

Mystery, who also goes by the name Erik von Markovik leads a series of educational seminars across North America on what he calls the Mystery Method, which he claims teaches men how to meet women. A two-day seminar costs about $650, and customers are willing to pay because Mystery has developed a reputation as one of the world's pre-eminent PUAs (pickup artists).
For those unaware of Mystery and his peers, they are young to middle-aged men who call themselves the "seduction community", which is a lot bigger than one might expect. Every day, thousands of men from across North America log in to forums and newsgroups. Dating consultants are nothing new but while most dating consultants, profess that their teachings will lead to quick success, Mystery champions the value of hard work. He emphasizes that his system requires at least 200 approaches (beginning conversations in public places) before the aspiring PUA will become proficient.
As a child Mystery was always reading, or on the computer. He particularly loved to take apart electronic devices, such as remote-control model cars, to "reverse-engineer" them - a method of determining how something works. As a teen, he discovered magic, which provided him with a way to receive approval from others. At 19, he began visiting bars where bored drinkers were happy to witness his tricks. Some managers began paying him to wander their clubs, performing tricks. Consequently, he grew adept at ingratiating himself into groups. "Approaching groups of people at clubs was my job," he recalls. "That's how I really learned how to interact with others, because I was able to hide behind the magic."
Mystery also discovered something else; his stunts helped him to charm young women, who he had previously found difficult to relate to. When he did fail to engage a woman in conversation, he used his considerable powers of analysis and introspection to determine what had happened, disassembling personal encounters the same way he had once examined remote-control cars.
"What Mystery has done is reverse-engineer human behavior," says one follower. "He cracked the code and found an answer to Sigmund Freud's baffled question, "What do women want?" and all of a sudden, women's behavior, something which has baffled the greatest writers, thinkers, and scientists for ages isn't all that mysterious anymore."


And just what is it then that women want? Forget flowers and flattery and romantic gestures and anything women say they want. Forget money and status and being good with kids.
According to Mystery and others like him, what women want is an alpha male Among other things, this means a man capable of social dominance (roughly: being a leader and protector) which appeals to their hypergamy (desire for a partner of greater status).
The idea is that human evolutionary history has hard-wired much of what people find attractive. For men, these are signs of fertility (relative youth, a curvy figure and health) while for women these are indications of social status and resources. Many of the hind brain (reptilian) impulses of humanity can be modified by culture, experience and hard necessity. But prosperity and technological progress, ironically, allow them to pursue their genetic impulses in their purest (or basest) forms.
While most PUAs are not socially dominant outside of bars, Mystery and other PUAs say that almost any man can successfully mimic behaviors associated with social dominance to become more attractive to women. It's the form, not the content, that attracts them. The application of PUA techniques is called game by its practitioners.
PUAs have developed a remarkably detailed repertoire of tactics. Peacocking is the practice of dressing outlandishly to attract the attention of good-looking women. Mystery typically wears fur top hats, paints his nails black and often wears platform shoes. He says, "The idea is not to fit in. It's to stand out." He's also developed an extensive technical jargon of the kind his socially awkward male students are comfortable with. Many of the terms come from popular culture or the social sciences (often used idiosyncratically).
The basic way his method works is as follows. Once a PUA identifies an attractive woman, he should open (infiltrate) the set (group) she's with. While traditional dating advice concentrates on situations when a man meets a woman by herself, women seldom venture into any kind of social gathering by themselves and so the man who wants to meet women must learn to deal with groups of their friends.
Counter intuitively, at first he should ignore the target (woman he's interested in) and instead be friendly with her acquaintances. And if there are men with her, the PUA should befriend them first: "You lead the men, the women follow."


Soon after, the PUA must issue a neg (teasing comment or backhanded compliment) to the target:  "Nice nails. Are they real?" Mystery believes such banter works to differentiate the pickup artist from other men in the mind of the target, whose good looks mean she's accustomed to eliciting admiration from the males she meets. Aloof humor at her expense doesn't insult her, it intrigues her. They also work to lower her bitch shields (defense mechanisms).
Mystery's method also involves fine points of body language that are indicators of social dominance The PUA doesn't lean forward to better hear what a woman is saying in a loud bar, he waits for the women to lean toward him instead. He also doesn't face her directly (a possible indicator of supplication and low status) but manages to sit or stand at an angle facing away from the target).
The core of the Mystery Method is a series of pre-rehearsed routines (anecdotes). These are intended to highlight the attractive aspects of the client's personality and are responses to questions that typically come up in social situations. If the questions don't arise naturally, a wingman (an accomplice, also known as a wing) may help provide opportunities for the PUA to demonstrate his high value. The wing can also occupy the target's friends, and crucially, prevent her female friends from cockblocking (interrupting the seduction scenario).
After sensing IOIs (indications of interest) such as personal questions, or kino (touching) or other traditional signs of female interest (touching or flipping hair or palming) the PUA isolates the target from her friends. Here he has to remember to apply cat string theory; he gives evasive and/or joking answers to questions keeping the truth just out of reach. This keeps the woman interested in him (a technique also used in sales).
At some point he invents a reason to leave expressing regret their conversation has to end. If things have gone well she'll volunteer her phone number. This is known as a number close. He also might try for a kiss close. If things are going very well he'll try to bounce (isolate her further by suggesting they change venues). By visiting two or three places together that first night her internal clock is distorted making her feel as if she's known him longer than she has.
Along the way he must be ready to deal with her anti-slut defenses (second thoughts) and shit tests by which women subconsciously determine whether a man is socially dominant enough.


Typical shit tests include asking for drinks or small favors (he should refuse) or saying that she has a boyfriend. While one correct response to this is: "I don't care," another might be "That's okay, I have a girlfriend." This plays into pre-selection.
According to PUA theory nothing makes a man more attractive to women than the knowledge that some other woman found him attractive enough to date and/or sleep with. Another PUA technique is to flirt with a woman he's not interested in where the target will notice. If the first responds positively, this will provide him with social proof (evidence taken from other people's behavior).
At all costs, he needs to avoid appearing beta. The beta male is the non-socially dominant counterpart of the aloof alpha. Typically, betas take typical female advice on how to meet women seriously. They try to act smart and funny and white knight (defend women) and try to impress them with gifts and may even make romantic gestures. Typically they put women on a pedestal (assume that women are better than men). Usually women put such men in the friend zone (outside of any romantic or sexual interest). If a beta does manage to get a girlfriend, he's liable to suffer from oneitis (excessive attachment to a particular woman).
No issue divides the opinion of PUAs (and shows the internal contradictions of their lifestyle) like that of beta males. Many simply view betas with contempt or pity. Others use women's treatment of betas as justification for their own questionable behavior.
They argue that in the past, beta providers (average men with jobs who want to have a family) could find wives but women's economic empowerment has diminished their value. One prominent PUA blogger frequently claims that the fact that he can pursue the PUA lifestyle is evidence for the imminent collapse of western civilization. He even argues for a societal return to the traditional family values that he has no intention of embracing himself.
It is here that PUA interests intersect with those of MRAs (men's rights advocates). The world of MRAs is a darker and often disturbing mixture of attempts to redress legitimate complaints (abuses in family law that victimize men) and outright paranoia and extreme social reaction (arguing against the female right to vote).


PUAs and MRAs also have another trait in common – they intensely dislike western women and American women in particular. They accuse them of not being feminine enough and for ... choosing alpha seeming PUAs over more respectable betas.
Many speak approvingly of women in other parts of the world, where worse economic conditions and traditional culture mean that women are 'still' women.
Asian and African women have their supporters though many find the former too materialistic and the latter too aggressive. The most popular women with most PUAs are Latin American (especially Columbian Brazilian) and Eastern European (especially Polish, Estonian and Russian).
All in all the question most people have about PUAs is: Are they happy? But the answer isn't simple. Almost all PUAs note that success with PUA techniques has a heavy emotional price.
There are stories of unbalanced behavior from Mystery and one writer claims to have once talked him out of suicide. Many of them become so adept at feigning emotions (the better to manipulate their targets) that they become emotionally alienated and have trouble maintaining any lasting or satisfying human relationship except with other PUAs.
Some of them claim that the techniques they use in seduction can improve relationships with girlfriends and wives. But another wrote that while game helped his short term success with women he had to unlearn many of its principles in order to maintain an LTR (long term relationship). Others find maintaining any kind of LTR to be impossible. Some even claim that seduction becomes an addiction, a compulsion carried out for its own sake, often with no real pleasure involved.
The bitterest irony is that many men who turn to game to improve their relations with women despair of the psychological portrait of women that emerges from game.
"The only thing more soul-crushing for a man than failure with women," one said "is success with women."