/lit/ - Literature

>>12175928
Write, study, better myself. I've been browsing this site again lately only because of a cold.
>>12175942
>There is no cost. It's exercise. The human body is designed to engage in activity instead of doing nothing.
I just explained the profound physiological toll this act inflicts. Did you even read the previous post?
>There are scientifically proven benefits to sexual activity
These are from lifestyle questionnaires, ie surveys, that "prove" nothing. Usually an inability to obtain sex, shows that there are certain constraints (work, lack of partners, health issues, medications) likewise bring with them unhappiness whereas people able to indulge it more freely are happier, especially in a culture where it is celebrated heavily.
There aren't experimental studies that I'm aware of isolating individuals. Instead, we can extrapolate from studying the physiology of the act the potential toll that it can inflect. The opinion of medicine for hundreds of years before the 1940s was of the opinion that sexual excess was responsible for numerous ailments; suggesting that sexual activity MIGHT be costly to engage in is not an absurd premise and one that has existed for thousands of years.
>I swear you celibatefags are retarded, it's all because of your stupid Christianity
It's amazing that the only possible conclusion to all of this is that there has to be some sort of religious beliefs driving it. My opposition to indulgence in sexual activity stems from my own experience with adverse effects. I always noticed how I would be slower, read less and worst of all suffer from extremely low motivation. As the years progressed, I noticed my sexual frequency INCREASED which shows how strongly subject to habituation this was and how the urge to do it wasn't something of my will but habit and reinforced drive that followed.
I never believed in God. I have one shot at this this life the way I see it and I'm not wasting my experience reinforcing some primal drive to hijack what little agency I'm able to exert over it.

>>12148554
>I want to be a doctor
Surmising from your post, you're in it for the title, not the interest. If you're genuinely interested in medicine, you should at the very least have an idea what specialty you want to get into not just "being a doctor". The best physicians knew what they wanted to do long before they went into medical school.
If you need to read books for inspiration and are not already reading the medical journals on your own initiative, then I'm afraid to say you should reconsider being a physician. Most physicians aren't good at what they do because their impetus for getting into medicine was founded on one of these three things, the want of 'helping people', the prestige, or the money rather than holding a genuine fascination of medicine. This means, they don't bother searching for journal articles and are self-assured in all diagnoses; confined by useless maxims, which they project onto more talented physicians whenever they go beyond their cookie cutter on-label approach. A wise man knows what he doesn't and explores out of curiosity other hypotheses as intensely as he can. Unfortunately, the aforementioned motives are what drives most to get into medicine which means most people are not that talented or intelligent.
As to examples, contemporary examples of inspirational physicians are few and far between. The ones of the past are more fascinating, even if they were a little crazy. Even walking through a hospital wing and seeing portraits of the head physicians, you can see the decline in the stock of them as the years progressed. The writing in the journals have also declined. The language was once complex and illustrious, now it's simpletons trying to sound smart. Remove the technical jargon, and you'll see that the passion in even journal publications has declined.

>>11951306
You are dealing with low IQ cretins who wish only to replace the hand with a corporeal body. Usually such a person isn't very bright. They're not really "cured", they're still hypersexual in thought and this manifests in their writing.
They too are attempting to moderate their stance on the question of self-abuse in order to sell it to the masses. Weak tepid opinions seeking to win the approval of others usually incorporates poor writing, trying to appease or buildup to a certain point rather than just laying the truth out there and emphatically defending it.
The reason so many people do not take the concept of sexual abstinence seriously is precisely due to the nofap community and contemporary literature surrounding it. They just make a poor case.

Kellog in contrast was a fantastic writer. Read some of his works on Diet or Plain Facts for Old and Young. Disagree with him all you want, he wasn't a bad writer.

Here is a passage from the his aforementioned book
>Emission not Necessary to Health.—If it be argued that an occasional emission is necessary to relieve the overloaded seminal vesicles, we reply, the same argument has been used as an apology for unchastity; but it is equally worthless in both instances. It might be as well argued that vomiting is a necessary physiological and healthful act, and should occur with regularity, because a person may so overload his stomach as to make the act necessary as a remedial measure. Vomiting is a diseased action, a pathological process, and is occasioned by the voluntary transgression of the individual. Hence, it is as unnecessary as gluttony, and must be wasteful of vitality, even though rendered necessary under some circumstances. So with emissions. If a person allows his mind to dwell upon unchaste subjects, indulges in erotic dreams, and riots in mental lasciviousness, he may render an emission almost necessary as a remedial effort. Nevertheless, he will suffer from the loss of the vital fluid just the same as though he had not, by his own concupiscence, rendered it in some degree necessary. And as it would have been infinitely better for him to have retained and digested food in his stomach instead of ejecting it—provided it were wholesome food—so it would have been better for him to have retained in his system the seminal fluid, which would have been disposed of by the system and probably utilized to very great advantage in the repair of certain of the tissues.

>>11836799
>Pythagoras, Philosopher and Mathematician: “According to Pythagorus (6th century BCE) sex should be practiced in the winter, but not the summer, but was harmful to male health in every season because the loss of semen was dangerous, hard to control and both physically and spiritually exhausting…” “Pythagoras himself established a small community that set a premium on study, vegetarianism, and sexual restraint or abstinence. Later philosophers believed that celibacy would be conducive to the detachment and equilibrium required by the philosopher’s calling…” – Source: Uta Ranke.Heinman (1988).

>Galen, 2nd century Greek medical writer: “It is not at all surprising that those who are less moderate sexually turn out to be weaker, since the whole body loses the purest part of both substances, and there is besides an accession of pleasure, which by itself is enough to dissolve the vital tone, so that before now some persons have died from excess of pleasure.” – From his work “On Semen”.

>Sigmund Freud Psychologist, founder of Psychoanalysis: “Freud held the opinion (based on personal experience and observation) that sexual activity was incompatible with the accomplishing of any great work. Since he felt that the great work of creating and establishing psychotherapy was his destiny, he told his wife that they could no longer engage in sexual relations. Indeed from about the age of forty until his death Freud was absolutely celibate “in order to sublimate the libido for creative purposes.” – according to his biographer Ernest Jones.

>Georg Hackenschmidt, 20th century strongman, wrestler and philosopher: “Moderation in sexual intercourse is very important. Sexual abstemiousness should be strictly observed during the early age of manhood and development. He who observes this recommendation will soon benefit by the immense prerogatives of chastity. A few years ago a colleague of mine said to me: “Nonsense, that is only human nature.” This “clever” man, however reached only a secondary position as a strong man, and now, at the age of thirty, he is actually degenerating as an athlete.” – From his book; “The Way To Live”

>>11702795
You either: 1) Never were deliberately abstinent both physically and mentally and thus have no frame of reference; or 2) are not very intelligent and consequently lack self-awareness.

Masturbation measurably increases prolactin which we know exerts an adverse effect on dopamine signalling. Most laymen counter "b-but the refractory period is only 15 minutes", but this is another matter entirely and hence is a straw man. Serum prolactin remains elevated for nearly two weeks and most significantly for 16 hours. Any elevation will cause a decrease in dopamine transmission; while it may not be enough to induce a refractory period, that does not mean it isn't adversely affecting other dopaminergic centers responsible for motivation. fMRI studies show activity increases in the primal centers, eg. amygdala, medial preoptic area, temporal lobe and septal areas and meanwhile decreases in prefrontal cortex.
The hypothesis that masturbation and sexual activity had a cost to be paid has existed for thousands of years. It is only recent times, past 60 years or so, where we've been hoodwinked into thinking that this is "harmless".

Getting on with your day after masturbating is possible but you need to force yourself to do anything. The rest of the day at that point is just brute discipline and unhappiness. You want to do plenty of things, and have the best intention to do them but never do.
In an abstinent state, motivation to tackle the entire day ahead is effortless and abundant.

>>11644395
I rejected it entirely as indicated by:
>I never mentioned that leading a chaste lifestyle led to greater intelligence (a major presumption to your argument). It leads to utilizing the life you have.
The followup argument to your thought for point number three, "Wether [sic] to yourself or to others you remain chaste to seem smarter", makes no sense in light of this.

>>11639291
A clean enviroment free of any sexually arousing stimuli.
I also adblock every single thumbnail so I am not aroused by any.

So long as the enviroment and my mind are chaste, all other details are irrelevant. I can be productive and write to my heart's content.

Sexual arousal and release ruins everything. It creates a vicious cycle where you are doing it at least once daily and any time after it is done, you are tired. I will spare you the details but it has adverse effects on dopaminergic neurotransmission. In addition to motivation being wrecked, creativity is also ruined.

The trick to abstinence is to not get aroused in the first place.

Take the breadpill.

>>11626617
>a good thing
Heroin brings pleasure. That does not make it a "good thing" or logical to inject.
There is a neuro-endocrine-physiological toll to be paid for sexual activity. The worse penalty is squandering motivational resources on an activity that accomplishes nothing. Ejaculation causes prolactin release, which is anatagonistic to dopamine which leaves you unmotivated and tired. You've accomplish nothing. You soon enough become a slave to daily if not more frequent release. This isn't maximizing you're potential, it's mediocritizing it.