Holding On to the Illusion
The false path of a phantological approach to life
Phantology: A subset of ontology which defines being and existence according to the individual’s own imagination and preferences.
It is difficult to distinguish between the Gamma’s claimed philosophy, which is usually based on some form of secular materialism, and his actual philosophy, which is centered around his psychological need to maintain his Delusion Bubble. But one thing that has struck me with various monomaniacs of different kinds over the years, from atheists to people who erroneously believe themselves to be Zen Buddhists, is the way that all of them define reality through appeals to their own imagination.
I mistakenly described this as an ontological approach, since it is conceptually very similar to what is known as the ontological argument for the existence of God, but that’s not actually correct, because ontology is a much broader term and the ontological argument is really not a very apt or useful name despite its respectable intellectual lineage.
The first ontological argument in Western Christian tradition was proposed by Saint Anselm of Canterbury in his 1078 work, Proslogion, in which he defines God as "a being than which no greater can be conceived," and argues that such a being must exist in the mind, even in that of the person who denies the existence of God. From this, he suggests that if the greatest possible being exists in the mind, it must also exist in reality, because if it existed only in the mind, then an even greater being must be possible – one who exists both in mind and in reality. Therefore, this greatest possible being must exist in reality. Similarly, in the East, Avicenna's Proof of the Truthful argued, albeit for very different reasons, that there must be a "necessary existent".
However, we need a different term that can be applied to a wide variety of arguments utilizing the same basic structure of “it exists if I can imagine it” lest we be left attempting to distinguish between an ontological argument focused on existence and being and an ontological argument focused on imagination and non-being.
In today’s comic, the Gamma is arguing against the Delta risking the moment of truth and learning whether or not the hot redhead is willing to go out with him. This delay is quite common among all SSH ranks; until very recently, NFL head coaches would always choose to accept a reduced chance of winning in order to put off the final moment of truth.
But phantology is a false philosophy. Our imaginations do not dictate or determine reality. The longer we cling to a belief in the imagined nonexistent, the further off track our lives will inevitably go.
Deltas should not think asking a girl out in public is a potential risk to telegraph low status when they get rejected. It is in fact an opportunity to:
1. Demonstrate boldness to everyone present, including women.
2. Demonstrate handling rejection with equanimity.
3. See who has your back, and remove those who don't from your circle.
Some time ago I worked in a company and there was a nice cleaning girl that came. I introduced myself and asked if she had a boyfriend as soon as she came to my desk. She wasn't particularly interested, but after that everyone in the office looked me differently. Except of course the one gamma, who tried to make fun of me, revealing what he was in the process. No one, literally no one worthy of your attention will try to hold rejection against you. When he does, merely ignore him. What's happening is obvious to everyone present. They are in fact impressed, as we would be.
The more I learn about who the gamma is and how he lives, my hatred increases. Disgust is my shield. It's offensive to call him good, wise or smart, or a friend, when this is how he speaks.
My gym buddy found his wife because I said the opposite of what this gamma says. And I got to be the friend who persuaded a friend to believe. Instead of this disgusting and depressive ball and chain.