The basic flaw with The Game(and most of the games of the characters in it) is that they take this to such extreme that instead of becoming charming and attractive, you become a paranoid insecure jerk.
That said, The Game has helped motivate many to take action in a critical area of their life.
OF COURSE people will find it easier to agree with you if they have agreed with you before - that should be obvious. The question is - what do you have to do to get that? 'The Game' seems to say - "well, anything that is necessary, of course", as though aping people into nodding was some kind of accomplishment and as though that accomplishment in itself was admirable and healthy.
I'd rather have people actually agree with me in small things that we both care about and then be happy to agree with me big time. If you need to bullshit, "warm up" or in some other ways mislead people (and yes, that includes "Weather is great, isn't it?" when you don't really care about the weather), you are building a pile of very tiny lies to make the jump to the big lie less noticeable. At some point, you will just cross the bullshit horizon, the point at which MOSTLY what you do is lie to and trick people - and have fun with your empty soul while you're at it.
It is indeed a cargo cult - you do achieve things with it, but then you sit there in your wooden mock-up flight control tower next to your empty dirt runway wearing your headphones made of straws and wonder why you never seem to actually be happy.
Similarly, while some of the relationships formed from your pickup skills may be premised almost entirely on lies, that is not the norm. I'd actually say most relationships turn out to be much like normal relationships--and most certainly not a type where the other party is thinking you're a millionaire when in fact you are broke in reality.
"I'd actually say most relationships turn out to be much like normal relationships"
I'm not sure you realize how extremely shady that sounds. Does that really sound satisfying to you? Real and honest? I understand that manipulating people into forming a relationship (of whatever kind) with you can somewhere in the end resemble something like a genuine relationship. But that still doesn't make it a genuine relationship. It either is a runway and you are a tower operator, or not.
If you define a relationship as one where two people occupy the same room and have frequent conversations then a lot of things are a relationship - all the way to a torture chamber. What I'm talking about is two people who really care about each other.
'The Game' is very particularly about getting women into bed. Being in bed together is usually related to a deep, emotional connection, but pickup artists just care about that last bit. To stay in the metaphor: They really, really do care about making those cargo planes appear. Boy do they ever love that cargo. They do everything they have seen others do to provoke the kind of reaction from the planes that they have observed. What they don't care so much about is what those planes are, why they usually care about ACTUAL runways and care about having a very good reason to drop off their cargo.
Because if they did care to understand, they'd very quickly see how pathetic it is to sit in that makeshift straw hut pretending to be an international airport.
So yes, Radix is correct - that's what I'm talking about. What ends up on the runway are either pilots who actually wanted to be somewhere else and try their best to take off as fast as possible, or are other islanders who push their own wooden boxes with straw wings onto the dirt road.
[edit] Maybe the easiest way to sum this up is: The fact that cargo arrives on your dirt runway doesn't make you a proper army radio tower operator. The fact that you score women or get people to do things that you want doesn't make you a good partner or friend.
That is only one type of relationship.
Every night thousands of men and women meet at bars and end up sharing a bed without necessarily the expectation that they each "really care" for the other. So this is the other extreme.
Between our two extremes lie all the other shades of gray.
I totally get that people are into that, but I really don't see them very happy is what I'm trying to say. The ones that find that sort of behavior to be pure bliss very often turn out to be rather shallow.
I also understand that sort of hedonism to be, supposedly, very glamorous - they argue that you only have 80 years, so better squeeze the juice out of every second you get in as self-involved a fashion to satisfy your desires as possible. As long as caring so much about other people is not on your list of priorities, it's very hard for me to make a case against that. I suppose it also comes easy to you when you're very young - the world just automatically cares more about you. What happens after 40 or 50 is a different story. (And yes, I've heard the live-fast-die-young argument where people would rather go down that road and die in their late thirties. Sounds super.)
I would rather spend those 80 years as much as possible with people I intensely care about (and who care about me) and while that may be uncommon in your statistics, I think I'm still in my right to argue that it's healthier. And not just because it carries a much smaller risk of contracting various venereal diseases.
Look, I know a lot of people who are not into that and have super caring relationships and as a result are unhappy. Happiness is such a tricky thing: if you really care about someone and yet a specific part of them displeases you, well, you're unhappy. This doesn't mean you shouldn't care about someone; it does mean that your arguing that caring equals happiness is still gross oversimplification.
But to be perfectly honest, I'm not sure why they bother.
You're just looking at the empty half of the glass. If I were to do the same, I would look at the constant bickering of my neighbors in their 70s and the seeming unhappiness and wonder why anyone ever bothers getting married and remaining married.
Sure, long-term relationships can be a terrible experience. But I have my doubts whether your neighbors really still care about each other. (I know, no true Scotsman, but there really is "caring" and "staying together for the kids".) It's very easy to become unhappy in whatever way, but I think it's easier to become unhappy on your own, independent and unaffected by the concern of and for other people, than it is in a caring relationship.
And you are of course right - you can find unhappiness even when caring deeply about people. I just think that it's fair of me to say that if chances really are so equal, I'd rather live in the world where people try to care.
It's simply easier to turn a net quality of life increase for society from people who are into caring about each other than from people who don't. In fact, I think the second model, while popular for a while, has quite thoroughly collapsed in the recent years.
I just wanted to say it's been fantastic to read what you've written. Thank you.
Emil
Not if you feel every relationship that doesn't contain your atypical definition of "care" is not worth having. Sounds narrow-minded to me.
I could write about how providing someone pleasure can be a form of care. But we'll leave it here and agree to disagree =)