← back

notes on dating (with hannah)

16nov2025 - 12AM EST - 285 Bedford Ave, Brooklyn, NY 11211

modern dating * actions * summary by claude * actions by claude

modern dating

• who do i know vs. who am i going to meet
• vague goals and rules about ideal partner (no actual criteria to select)
  • even if superficial imagine 3-4 critical things you want that are criteria for dating someone (hannah's exercise that christian liked)
  • opposed to dating vaguely and goal posts shifting
    • leading to not taking people seriously
    • leading to opting out of relationships when it starts to get difficult
• look at track record
  • even if you have (in your mind) tried to date in earnest there are likely blindspots
  • if you have been unable to find a serious relationship YOU are the common denominator
    • this is good, there is opportunity to control this (more easily than controlling others)
      • are you not able to describe your dating patterns
      • do you believe it is always the other person
        • if it is the other person, why are you dating people with similar attributes
      • if it is not the other person, what are you doing wrong
    • regardless of the outcome there is something you change/learn from
  • think about the people you date and the common issues you have run into
  • how are you part of the problem
• other notes:
  • men not having to work hard, for what they want
    • access to girls giving them 'girlfriend privileges' without commitment
      • sex/types of quality time/types of emotional connection/types of physical intimacy or gift giving
      • is this appropriate? are you ok with settling this way?
    • often people talk about not wanting to 'settle' for a partner, but you end up settling for something shitty still (so YOU are still SETTLING, just not for something long term?)
    • corelated to empowerment of women, being able to have opp's for sex and physical intimacy, low stakes
      • this is nice in theory but in reality it is just game theory for a lot of men and women
      • want to feel like you are 'winning' if you don't feel this way you may not be able to opt into a relationship easily
  • in a lot of traditionally relationships (and in life generally)
    • you have to commit to things long term to see results
    • you do not get to do anything difficult or get a reward without having longer time horizons
    • again related to settling for 'situationships' + 'fwb' (fear of vulnerability/easy sense of self esteem, convivence of having sex/frivolous relationships you are still settling for something even worse)
  • online dating
    • dating in a vacuum where there is
      • 0 context for the other person
      • immediately turns into a romantic relationship (unnatural)
        • argue against that is often ideas of love at first sight
          • airport crush/cute person at bar
        • in reality these things still have a lot of context, there are more human heuristics to this
      • the vacuum created gives your heuristics that may not signal well in reality
        • signals for what you have already experienced or what is familiar will be picked up on
          • easy to date in the same PATTERN (imagine driving down a highway vs. driving through an old dense forest with no existing roads, your neural pathways are like this for all things)
            • subconscious feelings and decisions might guide you/lie to you
          • vs. signals that are actually good
            • again important to define what you actually want
            • what are useful heuristics
  • dunbar number
    • average person can only maintain 150 meaningful relationships
    • humans are context based even past small numbers
      • seeing someone out of their context and they are unrecognizable briefly although familiar
      • seeing a stranger in a familiar context, and you mistake them for someone you know
    • related to analysis paralysis
      • go to store there are 150 hot sauces
        • probably pick the ones you are familiar with
          • if not, then ones with similar heuristics - label, color, shape, ingredients
        • there may be one that exists that would suit you even better, but you would never try it
    • if you were in a situation where you only new 100 people
      • you would certainly be able to pick out who you would want to marry
      • unlimited number of potential spouses (each imbibed with your imagination having better and better attributes) there will never be enough
    • are fears of settling 'anxiety/inadequacy/status climbing'
    • or fears of intimacy 'self worth, fear of judgement, fear of failure, fear or rejection:'
      • etc. stopping you?
      • do you repeat patterns with out knowing? do you repeat patterns while aware?
    • easy to get in your own way (by setting fake rules or goals) that will stop you from being at ease with yourself
  • analogy (christians's analogy that Hannah liked)
    • modern dating (especially with app use)
      • hinge/dating apps = uber eats a boyfriend
        • easy to extrapolate on (use ur brain)
          • expedient, convenient, soulless, instant gratification etc.
          • transactional mindset
          • removal of serendipity (even though you might mistake nervousness/physical attraction for this)
          • optimization for convenience disguised as quality
          • CONSUMER MENTALITY
  • social media generally (hinge but any other form)
    • performance
    • downloading a personality
    • mimetic desire
    • comparison traps (mine vs. theres, fake metrics not based on KNOWING)
  • who do i know vs. who will i meet
    • WHO AM I BECOMING? WHO WILL I BECOME
    • WHO WILL MY PARTNER BECOME??
    • select for 'trajectory values' vs. current state
  • instant chemistry, immediate attraction (social media/love at first sight)
    • romantic/feels good
    • has this worked for you historically?
      • is this just someone being sexy (not funny... this is dangerous)
        • sexy people can do mind control, you can be less aware of yourself
        • you can become desperate
        • you may think you have a deep connection with them but they are just fucking with your chemicals by being so sexy
        • mistake hormonal responses for "deep connection"
          • less self-aware
          • has intense physical chemistry actually predicted good relationships for you?
            • or has it predicted chaos, red flags you ignored, relationships that burned
    • does this help you select for long term partner (remember not negotiable attributes)
  • concrete vs. abstract criteria
    • balance of too vague and to particular
    • be like water

actions

• make a list of 4 attributes (better if non negotiables) that you want in a partner (does not matter if superficial or intentional) - these in theory should be criteria that you date based on
• examine relationships you have been in and notice if there are common patterns to how they end
• examine relationships you have been on and notice if there are common patterns to how they began
• think about your relationships with your needs vs. how people (peers/family etc.) will perceive you

summary by claude (tldr):

Core Themes

1. Self as the primary variable

• The individual is the common denominator in their dating patterns
• Blindspots, pattern repetition, and externalizing blame are obstacles to change
• Track record reveals more than intentions or stated preferences
• Control over one's own patterns is the most actionable lever available

2. Abundance paradox and decision paralysis

• Unlimited options prevent commitment rather than enabling better choices
• The Dunbar number constraint: humans default to familiar heuristics when overwhelmed
• Dating apps function like Uber Eats—transactional, convenient, optimized for ease over compatibility
• Infinite imagined alternatives make any real person seem insufficient

3. Signal corruption in modern dating environments

• Context collapse: Online dating strips natural social heuristics, creating vacuum where familiar patterns dominate (neural highways vs. forging new paths)
• Chemical hijacking: Intense physical attraction overrides judgment—hormonal responses misread as compatibility, reduced self-awareness, ignored red flags
• Performative identity: Social media encourages downloaded personalities and comparison based on appearance rather than actual knowing
• False immediacy: Instant chemistry and love-at-first-sight narratives feel compelling but rarely predict long-term success

4. The settling paradox

• Refusing to "settle" for commitment while settling for situationships/FWB—still settling, just for something worse
• Girlfriend privileges without commitment as game theory problem
• Need to feel like "winning" prevents genuine opt-in to relationships
• Fear of vulnerability masquerading as having standards

5. Time horizons and developmental thinking

• Meaningful outcomes require long-term commitment and tolerance for difficulty
• Modern dating culture optimizes for short-term comfort over long-term compatibility
• Critical shift: from "who do I know/will I meet" to "who am I/will I become" and "who will my partner become"
• Selection should prioritize trajectory and values over current state

6. Obstacles disguised as preferences

• Vague criteria and shifting goalposts enable non-commitment
• Fake rules and goals prevent ease with oneself
• Distinction between legitimate standards and anxiety/fear of intimacy/status concerns
• Need for concrete but flexible criteria—substance without rigidity

The mechanism: Without self-examination and clear criteria, people repeatedly select for familiarity, mistake chemistry for compatibility, and optimize for convenience over connection.

actions by claude:

Self-examination:

• List 4 non-negotiable attributes wanted in a partner (concrete criteria for selection, superficial or intentional)
• Map patterns in how past relationships began (what attracted you, what felt like "chemistry")
• Map patterns in how past relationships ended (common conflicts, reasons for leaving)
• Identify which needs are genuinely yours vs. what peers/family would approve of

Signal verification:

• When experiencing intense attraction, pause and ask: "Has this type of chemistry predicted good outcomes historically?"
• For each person dated, note: familiar patterns being repeated vs. genuinely new dynamics
• Track whether relationships selected for convenience/excitement or for long-term compatibility markers

Criteria refinement:

• Define what "trajectory/values alignment" means concretely (not just abstract compatibility)
• Identify useful heuristics for long-term partnership vs. misleading short-term signals
• Examine whether stated preferences actually align with dating behavior

Pattern interruption:

• When defaulting to familiar "type," question whether familiarity equals suitability
• Notice when game theory thinking ("am I winning?") interferes with genuine connection
• Recognize when settling for situationships while claiming to avoid settling

← back