GENIUS FORUMS

Animus:
You immerse yourself in philosophical and scientific matters which means you clearly desire the higher life but you can't seem to cope with the thought of abandoning your lust. To admit there is a problem would mean you'd have to give up that instant-pleasure side of your life. It is difficult to reconcile this impulse to a higher life with your lust. I understand. No one wants to admit that they could be doing psychological or spiritual harm to themselves when they have a goal but discover they'd have to compromise their lifestyle in order to attain it.

It may help you to know that men who are chaste give off a very desirable aura to women. Perhaps that will be convincing...

There is a video by Menoftheinfinite where Dan talks about the creationist claim "if there were no God, nothing would stop us killing each other". Dan points out that this is a statement about themselves, they are actually claiming that nothing would stop them from killing if there was no God.

I suggest that this is the reason you attribute onanism to me. You can't figure out why someone would argue with you unless they masturbate incessantly.

shakti.incarnate wrote:Animus:
You immerse yourself in philosophical and scientific matters which means you clearly desire the higher life but you can't seem to cope with the thought of abandoning your lust. To admit there is a problem would mean you'd have to give up that instant-pleasure side of your life. It is difficult to reconcile this impulse to a higher life with your lust. I understand. No one wants to admit that they could be doing psychological or spiritual harm to themselves when they have a goal but discover they'd have to compromise their lifestyle in order to attain it.

It may help you to know that men who are chaste give off a very desirable aura to women. Perhaps that will be convincing...

No

I'm simply arguing with the claim that chastity strengthens brain synapses because it has no basis in reality.

In society today, there are alarming increases in abortion, divorces, infidelity, rapes, low birth rates, pedophilia/children internet predators and shorter life expectancies.

There has also been a HUGE increase in sexual tolerance, a decrease on censorship, an increase in sexual articles in every day magazines, an increase in nudity on regular TV and general media, an early setting for "late night tv", a decrease in the age limit for buying sex paraphernalia and birth control and an increase in the distribution of pornography (just to name a few).

I am not stating there is a direct correlation between these things, but it sure isn't coincidence.

If you stir the mud at the bottom of a pond, all the water will eventually get dirty.

shakti.incarnate wrote:In society today, there are alarming increases in abortion, divorces, infidelity, rapes, low birth rates, pedophilia/children internet predators and shorter life expectancies.

There has also been a HUGE increase in sexual tolerance, a decrease on censorship, an increase in sexual articles in every day magazines, an increase in nudity on regular TV and general media, an early setting for "late night tv", a decrease in the age limit for buying sex paraphernalia and birth control and an increase in the distribution of pornography (just to name a few).

I am not stating there is a direct correlation between these things, but it sure isn't coincidence.

If you stir the mud at the bottom of a pond, all the water will eventually get dirty.

Well, you've adequately implied that the listed items are somehow undesirable, but you haven't justified that in any way.

I'm skeptical you even know what the causes of pedophilia are. You lump all these things together, as if they are simply manifestations of sexual indulgence. But this is certainly not the case for pedophilia!

You are going to have to do some genuine research on these subjects.

Mr. Tao tells you the media lies to you and you believe it.

Please take a moment to consider a few points brought to the table by an Ass who Talks®.

Up to this point, I would have to take the side of Mr Animus insofar as if we are going to defend celibacy or any benefit of retaining and/or rechannelling sexual energy we have to do it based on strict facts that describe 'real things' of physiology and psychology. The site of the so-called Mr Tao is one influenced by Srila Prabhupada and the ISCKON organization, which is a branch of the Vaishnava religion that migrated to the West in the late 60s.

For all that Vaishnava philosophy, springing as it does from Indian philosophy and spiritual and religious traditions of India, has good features, all of their ideas are based in a very antiquated cosmology and metaphysic that, try as it may, cannot and will not come into modernity. To be brief, they are, by and large, utter obscurantists. Srila Prabhupada---this is just one example---believed that the moon was farther away from the sun (because the Bhagavatam's cosmology describes it that way) and when the 'Mericans landed on the moon in '69, he dismissed it as an impossibility. The moon is, according to the Vedas, another kind of planet-world, i.e. not physical like our planet. Therefor, one cannot go there in material vessels, et cetera, et cetera. The whole structure of belief of the Krishnas is based on distortions such as this. Additionally, they are completely contemptuous of science, scientific methods and the 'speculations' of science (or in any other field). They are arch anti-intellectualists despite the (pseudo) intellectual patina they wish to cover themselves in.

The Hare Krishnas, by and large, have utterly distorted ideas about sexuality and, also by and large, the movement itself is in deep trouble as a result of this confusion and repression of sexuality.

I think we need to ask Shakti and Atum to come clean---to describe in more precise terms the religious structure they are speaking from, etc.

I personally agree that people have gone...well...ape-shit...all about sexuality, and this trend is only on the rise. Sexual permissiveness, lesbianism, homosexuality with a core ressentiment of heterosexual coupling, sexualization of children and children and sexuality, anger toward the traditional family structure, Internet porn, a radical new way to express sexuality---all of these things are strange and troubling. But, one has to keep one's head about one as one look at it. We can't, I don't think, revert to old methods and antiquated conceptions to pull us through a difficult period in modernity.

Animus:
You are making yourself out to sound like a clown.
All I can say is I hope you reflect on this in some time and become a real man, for your own sake.

I am done here.

edit: Talking Ass:
I agree with your last paragraph. I just don't think there is a "modern" way to go about avoiding sexual perversion that also eliminates perverted thoughts except celibacy, which isn't meant to repress those thoughts, but transfer that energy to places that would benefit more from it, like the brain.
I am not talking about any religious practices when I say this. Anyone who has studied science knows the benefit of energy to the body. And sexual energy, when released, makes you exhausted for a long period of time and in time just turns you into a lifeless zombie. Instead of wasting that energy, use it to your benefit.
That is my position on the entire matter. That is what I mean when I say celibacy is beneficial.
Look up a handful of geniuses from the past and the best of them were celibate; artists, writers, philosophers, scientists, composers... If you give it a try it will not be hard to see the benefits it has on your own work.

Talking Ass wrote:

Mr. Tao tells you the media lies to you and you believe it.

Please take a moment to consider a few points brought to the table by an Ass who Talks®.

I am glad you began your post like that so I knew when to stop reading.

Look up a handful of geniuses from the past and the best of them were celibate; artists, writers, philosophers, scientists, composers... If you give it a try it will not be hard to see the benefits it has on your own work.

Unfortunately, it just isn't quite like that. If it were, it would all be clear-cut, there would be no doubt at all. For each artist or writer (etc.) that you could name who was, perhaps, celibate, you could put another 8 beside him who wasn't.

See, even from an ass's perspective, you are using bad thinking to support your a priori conclusion: it is better for a group of different reasons if people choose to be celibate or sexually restrained. First, you are arguing with the wrong person. It is not that Mr Animus disagrees with your conclusion (if I have read him correctly), he disagrees with the pseudo-facts you have assembled to support your proposition. (And, if I understand this forum right, just like so many, he may well have forgotten if the vaginal slit goes up and down or to the side...)

(A smidgin of humor...heh heh).

No where did I attach any scientific claims to celibacy and the brain to make Animus doubt my posts.

And if anything is "pseudo-", it is the mush that the media feeds anyone who think they can engage in as much sexual sense-pleasure as they'd like and not experience the psychological and physical consequences in the long run.
A drop of water can't drown a man, but allow that drop to continue until it forms an ocean and that man will have wished he thought about building a boat at the first drop.

Talking Ass wrote:

Look up a handful of geniuses from the past and the best of them were celibate; artists, writers, philosophers, scientists, composers... If you give it a try it will not be hard to see the benefits it has on your own work.

Unfortunately, it just isn't quite like that. If it were, it would all be clear-cut, there would be no doubt at all. For each artist or writer (etc.) that you could name who was, perhaps, celibate, you could put another 8 beside him who wasn't.

See, even from an ass's perspective, you are using bad thinking to support your a priori conclusion: it is better for a group of different reasons if people choose to be celibate or sexually restrained. First, you are arguing with the wrong person. It is not that Mr Animus disagrees with your conclusion (if I have read him correctly), he disagrees with the pseudo-facts you have assembled to support your proposition. (And, if I understand this forum right, just like so many, he may well have forgotten if the vaginal slit goes up and down or to the side...)

(A smidgin of humor...heh heh).

You read correctly. I have not disagreed with the conclusions. At least in a generalized way. It's more or less the supporting pseudo-facts. The example I gave of Seminophagia (drinking semen) illustrated this humorously. The semen has nothing to do with what goes on in the brain. A person can have a dry-orgasm, which for all matter has the same orgasmic effect.

Atum wrote:You can have the fastest car in the world and the best map you could hope for, but it is all for nothing if there is no fuel at hand. Likewise, you cannot acquire wisdom without the ethic of chastity.

Perhaps the most penetrating description of the habit of masturbation is in a letter of C.S. Lewis, quoted by Leanne Payne in The Broken Image: "For me the real evil of masturbation would be that it takes an appetite which, in lawful use, leads the individual out of himself to complete (and correct) his own personality in that of another (and finally in children and even grandchildren) and turns it back, sends it back into the person of himself, there to keep a harem of imaginary brides. And the harem, once admitted, works against his ever getting out and really uniting with a real woman. For the harem is always accessible, always subservient, calls for no sacrifices or adjustments, and can be endowed with erotic and psychological attractions which no real woman can rival." This quotation can be applied to women as well as men, expressing the meaning of masturbation as a personal flight from reality into the prison of lust.

Tomas wrote:

Atum wrote:You can have the fastest car in the world and the best map you could hope for, but it is all for nothing if there is no fuel at hand. Likewise, you cannot acquire wisdom without the ethic of chastity.

Perhaps the most penetrating description of the habit of masturbation is in a letter of C.S. Lewis, quoted by Leanne Payne in The Broken Image: "For me the real evil of masturbation would be that it takes an appetite which, in lawful use, leads the individual out of himself to complete (and correct) his own personality in that of another (and finally in children and even grandchildren) and turns it back, sends it back into the person of himself, there to keep a harem of imaginary brides. And the harem, once admitted, works against his ever getting out and really uniting with a real woman. For the harem is always accessible, always subservient, calls for no sacrifices or adjustments, and can be endowed with erotic and psychological attractions which no real woman can rival." This quotation can be applied to women as well as men, expressing the meaning of masturbation as a personal flight from reality into the prison of lust.

Well if you ask me, cohabitating with a real woman is just as much a prison of lust.

And if anything is "pseudo-", it is the mush that the media feeds anyone who think they can engage in as much sexual sense-pleasure as they'd like and not experience the psychological and physical consequences in the long run.
A drop of water can't drown a man, but allow that drop to continue until it forms an ocean and that man will have wished he thought about building a boat at the first drop.

But hold on. Mr Animus told us all that he doesn't watch TeeVee, doesn't read print media, and doesn't even read newspapers on line. How then do you suppose he is speaking on behalf of the media's viewpoint? Just because I pontificate doesn't mean everyone should...

It is a separate---and very interesting---issue that 'media' has a whole, vast agenda in the purveying of sexual imagery, new models of sexual conduct, and all the rest. Huge financial enterprises are involved. Why it is occurring that an entire sexual ethic (with so much attached to it) is now shifting, radically, is a very interesting topic. If that is the point you wish to harp on, I have no doubt you will find many here who would strum the same instrument with you.

Most of humanity, if we were truthful, is at the stage and well invested in it of giving life over to sexual pleasures, almost exclusively. If you were to ask me, that is a subject on which the Vaishnava practitioners (as seers, as psychologists) have some very interesting perspectives. The idea-image that the whole world is aflame with sexual passion, that it consumes, that one's life-energy is burnt up with sexual passions and so many 'mistaken roads'. But this is just par for the course. Truthfully, this is how humanity as we know it lives. It is also the platform from which other sorts of men arise---those who, even if they don't deny sexuality in 'celibacy', succeed in channeling their energy toward higher enterprises. When a culture, such as our Western culture, achieves a stage when that culture en masse gives itself back over to unbridled sexual passion at the expense of higher goals of achievements, when it had been a long-standing value of that culture to be restrained in sexual expression, that is to be lamented. Yet, it seems to this ass that, still, the 'higher man', the uber-donkey if you will permit me, still has his eyes set on other, higher goals.

Who knows? It is almost necessary, and pretty much unavoidable now, that the whole planet will move in the direction of exploring unbridled anything-goes sexuality. It's like one taste of---what was it that drives you humans so bonkers?---'dopamine'? yes, dopamine, and you monkeys fly through the roof!

The question is, will you tire? And, once this trend has run its course, what profound changes will follow? For we note that major shifts in cultural patterns often produce grand changes in other, unrelated areas.

Animus wrote:

Tomas wrote:

Atum wrote:You can have the fastest car in the world and the best map you could hope for, but it is all for nothing if there is no fuel at hand. Likewise, you cannot acquire wisdom without the ethic of chastity.

Perhaps the most penetrating description of the habit of masturbation is in a letter of C.S. Lewis, quoted by Leanne Payne in The Broken Image: "For me the real evil of masturbation would be that it takes an appetite which, in lawful use, leads the individual out of himself to complete (and correct) his own personality in that of another (and finally in children and even grandchildren) and turns it back, sends it back into the person of himself, there to keep a harem of imaginary brides. And the harem, once admitted, works against his ever getting out and really uniting with a real woman. For the harem is always accessible, always subservient, calls for no sacrifices or adjustments, and can be endowed with erotic and psychological attractions which no real woman can rival." This quotation can be applied to women as well as men, expressing the meaning of masturbation as a personal flight from reality into the prison of lust.

Well if you ask me, cohabitating with a real woman is just as much a prison of lust.

Evidently you have not met any real, chaste women.

Yea, I lived with a girl for 2 years, and for the last year we didn't have sex. I'd say she was pretty chaste.

Animus wrote:Yea, I lived with a girl for 2 years, and for the last year we didn't have sex. I'd say she was pretty chaste.

Clearly she was not a real woman, (or perhaps she masturbated without your knowledge continuing her lust, or you did not stop with your masturbation, continuing your own) or else you would not have posted your previous statement.

How anyone can ignore the irrefutable evidence of God's existence is beyond me. You live your lives with blindfolds on, hating yourseves for not accepting what you know deep in your hearts to be true. God exists and you hate him for not making the truths of the world perceivable by your feeble intellects.

Atheism is driven by angst and confusion. Like a teenager who rejects the affection of his parents. Your parents love you and God loves you. Take comfort in that.

I had roast beef with the flying spaghetti monster last night.

Animus wrote:I had roast beef with the flying spaghetti monster last night.

Mocking is the result of insecurity.

shakti.incarnate wrote:

Animus wrote:I had roast beef with the flying spaghetti monster last night.

Mocking is the result of insecurity.

It's not mocking, it's a purely factual statement based on what I want to believe.

btw, where exactly in the heart should I be looking?

http://faculty.washington.edu/kepeter/1 ... _heart.jpg

How anyone can ignore the irrefutable evidence of God's existence is beyond me. You live your lives with blindfolds on, hating yourselves for not accepting what you know deep in your hearts to be true. God exists and you hate him for not making the truths of the world perceivable by your feeble intellects.

Atheism is driven by angst and confusion. Like a teenager who rejects the affection of his parents. Your parents love you and God loves you. Take comfort in that.

Actually, I would suggest that atheism, or a great deal of doubt and cynicism about men's conceptions of a 'supreme being', et cetera, et cetera, is a definite sign of maturity, the willingness to risk a testing one's beliefs, and a necessary step toward a truer understanding of things.

The problem, or a problem, seems to be that, analogously with the TBs of a religious orientation, who accept predefined notions about 'God' without really working through things themselves, is that many atheists simply escape into a prefabricated house (of thought) and employ their ideas about their atheism as ammunition against the (many) crass 'believers', who are, in so many instances, like giant, stupid children.

Whatever God is, or isn't, is nothing at all like what we used to think or what we have been conditioned to think. And our thinking is a long trajectory, that is, a historical progression, with meaning buried in an archaeology of signs, metaphors, mistaken metaphysics, word-formulas that, now, have been rendered irrelevant, nonfunctional---inoperative.

Friends, can a mere donkey---no encumbered, so clumsy---succeed in climbing Zarathustra's Mountain, there to feel the brisk wind on his muzzle along with Snake and Eagle who stare ruthlessly into the abyss? I rather think that yes, yes he can. And he will.

(Question: Is there a Starbucks up there, because I do like my coffee in the morning?)

I had roast beef with the flying spaghetti monster last night.

And then what happened?

Talking Ass wrote:

I had roast beef with the flying spaghetti monster last night.

And then what happened?

I hated him because he didn't explain everything to me through divine revelation.