/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16353589]

Books on respectful limits for sexual urges, or on how to decrease/constrain sexual desire?

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16353613]

>>16353589

[Anonymous No.16353643]

>>16353589
Realize sex outside marriage is a sin

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16353652]

>>16353643
>marriage
>sin

[Anonymous No.16353657]

>>16353652
based

[Anonymous No.16353663]

>>16353613
>>16353652

[Anonymous No.16353672]

>>16353589
JPII's Theology of the Body

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16353682]

>>16353663
>cult of fourchin
Read a book, kid.

[Anonymous No.16353724]

>>16353682
>>cult of fourchin
>Read a book, kid.

[Anonymous No.16353744]

>>16353652
Wait if morality is a spook what stops me from raping someone?

[Anonymous No.16353839]

>>16353744

What is your reward for raping someone? Why do you need the feeling of power and violence?

What kind of person is made by morality that then needs the morality that makes them? What kind of person wouldn't you be if there were never a story of morality that made you what you are that has to have a morality?

Always complete the circle. Never settle for fundamentals or axioms in a story that the story then cannot make. When you do this you will see how the spooks vomit themselves up from nothing.

Even Stirner missed this. He never realized that the ego itself was a spook!

[Anonymous No.16353873]

>>16353589
You just need a line or two
>sex is ok between two adults
>everything else is gross

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16353907]

>>16353744
A knife

[Anonymous No.16353949]

>>16353907
So is raping someone bad or not?

[Anonymous No.16353964]

I had a one night stand yesterday. It's fucking awful and incredibly awkward. Realize that sex is a passionate, emotional, relationship driven act. You can't detach emotions from sex and make it casual. One or both parties gets injured somehow.
What is a more viable route is to channel your sexual drive into your work and into finding a lasting partner

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16353999]

>>16353949
Sexually motivated assault is bad for everyone involved. Maladjusted sociopaths should be treated and prevented in sane society. That you’re uncertain about this is certainly troubling.

[Anonymous No.16354013]

>>16353999
Of course I don't deny that rape is bad. What I don't understand is what makes it bad if you subscribe to the notion that morality is a spook.

[Anonymous No.16354025]

>>16353999
this, read crime and punishment while you are at it.

[Anonymous No.16354031]

>>16353999
>Rape bad
>Sin doesn't exist
Ok tranny

[Anonymous No.16354049]

>>16354025
Reread it dummy, you didn't understand it

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16354058]

>>16354013
Read the damn book.

>>16354031
Read the damn book.
It’s a “sin” to eat pork. It is an age old “golden rule”, probably pre-lingual, to treat others as you would have them treat you.

[Anonymous No.16354075]

>>16354058
>to treat others as you would have them treat you.
So if I see someone and would like for them to treat me with sex, it is my moral obligation to treat them with sex?

[Anonymous No.16354079]

>>16354058
>things are spooks unless I believe them

[Anonymous No.16354081]

>>16354058
>It’s a “sin” to eat pork. It is an age old “golden rule”, probably pre-lingual, to treat others as you would have them treat you.

Yes, but what makes those statements true? Explain.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16354121]

>>16354079
Read. The. Damn. Book.
Things believed are spooks.

>>16354081
One cuts back on the eating of pork, the other makes for a more civil household and society
You are all sexual rejects because of the mountains of spooks you and others believe to be real.

[Anonymous No.16354151]

>>16354121
So rape isn't immoral.

[Anonymous No.16354154]

>>16354049
how come? i only said rape is bad for everyone involved, never mind the retard misusing Stirners philosophy

[Anonymous No.16354169]

>>16354121
well its believed murder is wrong, but guess thats just a spook.

[Anonymous No.16354185]

>>16354058
It's only forbidden for practicing Jews. Don't you know anything besides surface level reddit arguments?

[Anonymous No.16354191]

>>16353964

This seems like the only serious answer in the entire thread. I agree with you

[Anonymous No.16354195]

>>16354154
Sorry didn't mean to be mean. I thought the point of cp was that despite being able to get away with murder and being technically rational and justified in committing murder, Raskolnikov still feels guilty and can't just overcome sin with "logic."

[Jesus No.16354200]

>>16353589
fight pain with pain

[Anonymous No.16354211]

>>16353589
why do you want to constrain your bodies natural urge to reproduce? did somebody tell you it would fix your problems?

[Anonymous No.16354218]

>>16354121
Quite the moralist defense of your beliefs

[Anonymous No.16354228]

>>16353682
>>16353724
>>16353613
>>16353999
>uses words sociopath, detach emotions, casual sex, rape is bad
>"spook"

its like you just appreciate nihilism when you find it preferable.

[Anonymous No.16354265]

>>16354211

-Constant exposure to sexual stimuli/indulgence in sexual behavior produces a hedonic treadmill effect, where one needs increasingly disgusting/taboo sex to reach a certain level of arousal
-Risk of disease
-Directs energy/focus from more important things
-Constantly giving in to sexual urges makes one generally more impulsive
-Not giving in to sexual desire helps build willpower

[Anonymous No.16354281]

>>16354211
>why do you want to constrain your bodies natural urge to reproduce
Yes the point of the sexual organs is to reproduce. This is why it is a sin to have sex outside of marriage without the intention for procreation.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16354298]

>>16354151
Rape is bad. Already covered this. It comes from a bad place, bad frame of mind, and results in a lot of hurt. It isn’t just sex, it is a violent attack and may lead to a murder. These things are undesirable.
Labels like sin and morality are loaded with very old traditions that are generally true. But need I cite the pork thing again?
Sex sequestered by old men’s rules have grown stale and led to this ruin. You all should have been raised with girls as friends, taught to love yourself and treat them with kindness. Has sex to demystify it. As important as it is, you end up thinking about it 24/7 in various unhealthy ways when deprived of it. So by Christian standards, an “amoral” society would turn out more mature and well adjusted adults.

>>16354169
Who’s murder? Go kill the Clintons. No loss to the world. You’d probably hurt your own psyche, but we don’t need their type. Random murders, say of a woman you think is having too much sex, that’s just fucked up. We don’t need that type either.

>>16354185
And muslims. And some Christian sects who read the bible

>>16354228
We’re talking about moral nihilism. Too thick a topic for you?

[Anonymous No.16354335]

>>16354298
Where are you getting your moral standard from if you're an atheist nihilist?
>bad frame of mind
>bad place
>undesirable
Says who? Sounds spooky

[Anonymous No.16354365]

>>16354335
This. It's literally impossible to rationalize anything as objectively bad if there is no proper grounding in some higher law above human constructs.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16354377]

>>16354335
> Where are you getting your moral standard from
Your mum

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16354401]

>NO NOOOOOOO
>YOU JUST CANT CONSTRUCT YOUR OWN MORALITY WITHOUT A DEEP BELIEF IN A GOD!
>REEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.16354405]

Tranny makes up the rules when it bends to her vices. Typical degeneracy

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16354427]

>>16354405
Read Stirner, for fucksake

[Anonymous No.16354494]

>>16354427
Pitiful is the man who cannot defend or explain his own beliefs. He resorts to books and claims them as his shield.

[Anonymous No.16354505]

>>16354377
You have no answer, lul dummy

[Anonymous No.16354558]

>>16353964
>You can't detach emotions from sex and make it casual.
>One or both parties gets injured somehow.
Your experience is clearly not universal.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16354765]

>>16354494
You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink.
The water is right there already, but you won’t drink.

>>16354505
—> >>16354401
You are too dumb to see the answer when it is given. I guess you’d never understand even if you read the book.

[Anonymous No.16354891]

>>16354401
Jung proved this actually

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16355069]

>>16354891
Ohhh. So that’s what’s happened to me!
Nice side effect.

[Anonymous No.16355085]

>>16354765
Lul you're so dishonest. You always speak about your values as if they're universal but then you'll also claim to be a nihilist. Pitiful and spooked

[Anonymous No.16355131]

>>16355069
no as in you cannot create your own morality, and be consistent about it.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16355153]

>>16355085
Nihilism is a thing. I don’t pin it on my blouse and call it something I believe in. It’s just the facts of an indifferent universe.
Philosophy was conceived as how to see the world. How it works and how to live in it best. Constructing ethics, a code for conduct, is for easing our very difficult lives. Religions construct them, but you don’t need religion to construct any. “Jung says you gotta” I say no.
>>16355131
How consistent are we talking?
You do accept that the only constant in the universe is change, yes?

[Anonymous No.16355179]

>>16355153
>You do accept that the only constant in the universe is change, yes?
No.

[Anonymous No.16355243]

>>16355153
Read Aquinas

[Anonymous No.16355255]

>>16353589
Schopenhauer. You can't really be fully human if you are consumed by sexual lust.

[Anonymous No.16355301]

Is any topic fine on this shitty board as long as you start your retarded thought with "Books on"?

[Anonymous No.16355309]

Get married before Satan forces you to have sex

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16355327]

>>16355179
>>16355243

[Anonymous No.16355389]

>>16355327
Why did you leave fa, did people make fun of your shitty fits?

[Anonymous No.16355391]

>>16353643
Lusting after a woman is sin too. Better gouge your eyes, for it is better to enter heaven blind than have your whole body thrown into hellfire. I thought Christians were at least able to read the sermon on the mount.

[Anonymous No.16355415]

>>16355391

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16355425]

>>16355389
I didn’t show any fits. I was nabbing pics for possible “cops”

[Anonymous No.16355972]

>>16354558
It's universal, just hidden by deception and pain
>STDs all time high
>Unwanted pregnancies soaring
>Abortion rates skyrocketing
>Single parent homes are the new normal
>Men and women complaining about relationship fulfilment yet outwardly reject the idea of monogamy and fidelity

[Anonymous No.16355998]

>>16354298
>nothing matters in terms of right and wrong
actually no i don't anything a lonely and somewhat deranged lesbian on my Mongolian basket weaving board could ever comprehend is in anyway incomprehensible to me, except of course the subject of how a person becomes so utterly detestable and dull.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16356632]

>>16355998
>quotes no one
>Stumbles over some confused insult
>A post with the smell of an old crypt.
Sad person. I wonder what he wanted

[Anonymous No.16356677]

>>16353949
By stirner's logic its not bad if you want to do it and you dont get caught, butterfly is a degenerate stain who needs help and poisons the world with awful thinking.

[Anonymous No.16356781]

>>16354058
>Read the damn book.
The book doesnt say anything about being able to rape or not. In fact Stirner's ideas are in favor of rape as long as you enjoy it and dont feel like its a sacred obligation just as anything else. Thats the true liberating affect of Stirner.


>Sexually motivated assault is bad for everyone involved.
Not for the person who rapes.
>Maladjusted sociopaths should be treated and prevented in sane society.
People already kill eachother for sport and animals in cold blood while never being diagnosed for sociopaths, even in a "sane society" all it takes is a guy with having a psychosis to eventually rape some woman.
>That you’re uncertain about this is certainly troubling.
For you.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16357509]

>>16356677
>Advocates psychopathic rampages. “Stirner says it’s okay!”
You didn’t understand him.

>>16356781
>The book doesn’t say anything about rape, but Stirner says he is in favor of rape
>This is what the little voices in my head told me

> Not for the person who rapes.
Wrong. You’re underage.
> People already kill eachother for sport and animals in cold blood while never being diagnosed for sociopaths, even in a "sane society" all it takes is a guy with having a psychosis to eventually rape some woman
None of this made any sense. You really are under 17.
Appropriate picture, my idiot son.

[Anonymous No.16357626]

>>16353964
It's more that one night stands work in a similar way to dancing - some people have an easy time getting with the music and some don't. Most intellectual types lack the capacity to be lost in an emotional state, so sex becomes a more delicate occasion with a narrower window of fulfillment.

[Anonymous No.16358418]

I fuck my local escort twice a month for 100 bucks. Never masturbate anymore

[Anonymous No.16358423]

>>16355301
The topic would be fine if the replies actually tried to recommend books instead of arguing endlessly

[Anonymous No.16358468]

>>16357509
Not the guy you're replying to btw.
Can you give me a brief run down of Stirner's pro-human views. From what I remember, in Ego and its Own he takes a philanthropic view but just asserts that we should follow that path ourselves. He didn't really justify it.
In fact it flies in the face of the rest of the book and surely need backing.
In light of this, I'll ask what other posters have been asking: What is objectively wrong with rape? If it is not objectively wrong and it doesn't harm the perpetrator then why is that person wrong other than in your/society's opinion?
Even if you could defend the view that all rapists are worsened by rape, you would still encounter the same problem with minor moral infractions.

[Anonymous No.16358799]

>>16358468
Why would you even ask? Butterfly is simply asserting her “morals” out of her own aesthetic self-interest. Stirner never wanted his readers to parrot his beliefs: he wanted you to use his philosophy as a steppingstone then make your own way. There is nothing objectively wrong with rape, and I seriously think that Butterfly misunderstood Stirner at his core - either that or she’s trolling.

[Anonymous No.16358842]

>>16354377
fucking braindead pseud who read stirner and thinks spook daddy is so cool, while still being a moralfag
kindly, neck yourself, that would please my unique

[Anonymous No.16358853]

>>16353652
Stirner's a good read, and may be essential for timid nerds who need a kick in the balls, but Nietzsche made him redundant.

[Anonymous No.16358863]

>>16354401
Ok I'm constructing my own morality based on the premise that rape is good and work my way up from that.

[Anonymous No.16358896]

>>16353652
The biggest spook of all are fake pleasure hits that last a second and do nothing for you. You're literally cucked to your biology and urges for some spooked pleasure that's not even real. Whereas if I, solely for example and entirely theoretically, found butterfly and rob it of everything it owns, I have something to show for it and will continue to derive joy despite it having been passed.

[Anonymous No.16358897]

>>16357509
The book literally shits down on any imperative morality and very explicitly says to follow the desire of your ego. I dont know if your reading comprehension is fucked or not since this topic always makes women mald, but i never said that he talks about rape, but rather that his ideas do favor rape if that is the desire of your ego.

>Wahh wahh you must be underage if you think rape is cool, Stirner was a humanist
Pure malding.

[Anonymous No.16358987]

>>16357509
Holy fuck you are unbelievably stupid

[Anonymous No.16359033]

>>16357626
I'm always able to get into the dancing mood but I just cannot with sex it just does not work. It's a blessing

[Anonymous No.16360426]

page 11 is possible?

[Anonymous No.16361652]

is butter really in this thread
she's acting more retarded than usual
did something happen to her
this doesn't feel right

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16362465]

>>16361652
Did you know you inhabit a board full of angsty edgy teenagers who have trouble understanding things?
Stirner doesn’t advocate raping and murdering people. They’re all just in love with the idea that they have permission to do anything they wish. They don’t read or fail to read deeply enough to understand the tongue in cheek tone Stirner uses.

As for my morality or ethics, it’s based on universal respect being a wise choice. You don’t respect, you rape, you might just get your dick cut off by a UNION OF EGOISTS that don’t like rapists.

[Anonymous No.16362559]

>>16362465
yeah whatever bby grl I might be epically trolled I might be not
remember to take your meds and stay away from this kind of discussions they clearly are tensing you up

[Anonymous No.16362570]

>>16362465
Damn you are really focused on the rape question for some reason. It wasn't supposed to be about rape itself it was more about any moral question in general. What makes you think that any one thing can be called objectively bad or good if all morality is based on human constructs.

>inb4 read the book

stfu faggot.

[Anonymous No.16362578]

>>16362465
>Stirner doesn’t advocate
You do realise that stirner himself says you shouldn't give a shit about what he says right?

[Anonymous No.16362589]

>>16354558
he's right, but the problem is a lot of people can't distinguish between 'sex' and 'using another body for masturbation'.

[Anonymous No.16362648]

>>16353907
Do you have a license for that, miss?

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16362653]

>>16362559
The poor air quality here is making me a bit irritable actually. In general good spirits, so to speak.

>>16362570
No, someone made it about rape.
>Still having trouble with subjective desirability/undesirability

>>16362578
I don’t turn to the pages like a holy writ, but I believe I recall something like that. How about independent thinking?

[Anonymous No.16362824]

>>16353652
marriage could totally be an egotistical relation for both partners

[Anonymous No.16362868]

>>16362465
it's not that we believe that rape or murder is right, but that your reasoning for universal morality while advocating Nietzsche and Stirner because they are your daddy figures is retarded.

[Anonymous No.16362902]

>>16353589
fake pic. the real one has a female figure

nice try red dit

[Anonymous No.16364262]

>>16357509
This post finally revealead to me (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) how much of an idiot you are. Stirner's philosophy isn't hard to grasp so if you are misunderstanding it this much then you're a brainlet, there's just no other way. Either that, or you're baiting, or someone is pretending to be you and being genuine or baiting.

[Anonymous No.16364282]

>>16353949
Depends on who you ask.

[Anonymous No.16364377]

It always amazes me how many people on here don't grasp perspectivism. They can only think in absolutes. "Morality is not objective, therefore X is objectively good/bad" makes no sense except to brain damaged retards. If morality is not objective, then no moral judgements are objective, either. The question isn't "is rape good/bad?" anymore because there is no one single answer anymore. Whether it is good or bad is entirely relative.

[Anonymous No.16364420]

>>16353589
Definitely read Plato, the New Testament, and Montaigne.

>"If one would lay hand on the characteristic mark of Christianity, distinguishing it from all mono-theistic religions, it lies in nothing less than the upheaval of Law, of Kant's 'Imperative,' in whose place it sets free Inclination. In its own pure form it therefore is the presentation of a beautiful morality, or of the humanising of the Holy; and in this sense it is the only æsthetic religion."
- Schiller

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16364637]

>>16364262
This post reveales to me (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) just how much of an idiot you are. Stirner's philosophy isn't hard to grasp so if you’ve misunderstood it this much then you're a brainlet, there's just no other way. Either that, or you're baiting, as all anonymous should be assumed to be doing by default.

>>16364377
Thank you. Well said, philosophy reader.

[Anonymous No.16364671]

>>16364637
>Thank you. Well said, philosophy reader.
my sides
what he's saying goes against what you're doing, you complete idiot
your claim of "treat others as you would have them treat you" is in opposition to the his mentioning of "relative"

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16364678]

>>16364671
This is why you’re not getting what I’ve said. You’re completely ignoring it and making it up in your head.

I’d laugh harder but for the smoke. Just stop.

[Anonymous No.16364683]

>everything is a spook except the things which i think are not
the absolute state of the butterfaggot

[Anonymous No.16364982]

>>16364678
Butterfly, no level of cognitive dissonance and sophistry is going to stop you from being raped by a based union of egoists after you try to police them and tell them what they should or shouldn’t be doing out of your own self-interest.

[Anonymous No.16364987]

>>16364683
Based. Didn't feed the troll a (you)
>>16364982
Cringe

[Anonymous No.16365136]

>>16354335
When the Way is lost, morality arises

[Anonymous No.16365180]

>>16355391
I've already looked at thousands of hours of porn. Taking out my eyes isn't going to make any difference now.

[Anonymous No.16365186]

>>16365180
Repent

[Anonymous No.16365244]

>>16354058
>It’s a “sin” to eat pork
>Romans 14
>Acts 15
>Mark 7:15

[Anonymous No.16365275]

>>16365186
I meant there's already enough in my mind, that I'll never be clean of those thoughts and images. Having no vision wouldn't destroy that lust. Not that I am regularly looking these days.

[Anonymous No.16365358]

>>16365275
You can't control sudden thoughts, just make sure you don't encourage or humor them.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16365365]

>>16365358
>for god is spying on your every thought!

[Anonymous No.16365369]

>>16365358
The Jesus prayer helps a lot with this. I would recommend to anyone struggling.

[Anonymous No.16365391]

>>16365365

[Anonymous No.16365395]

>>16365365
You think that we are giving up our freedom but it is actually you unbelievers who are enslaved. Prisoners of passion, of lust, desire, pride. My yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16365403]

>>16365391

[Anonymous No.16365405]

>>16365395
>I'm not a schizo, you're just deaf to the voices!

[Anonymous No.16365410]

>>16365403
I will pray for you

[Anonymous No.16365465]

>>16365365
>Sapolsky
This asshole's an uber materialist/empiricist. Believes anything and everything deemed "verified". This is faulty and dangerous for the same reason as religion. It puts complete faith in those in charge of collecting empirical data. It puts complete faith in their methods, complete faith in their viewpoints, complete faith in their ability to reason. It puts an objective trust in the hands of the subjective individual's capacity to be objective.

[Anonymous No.16365470]

>>16365465
Sounds like the Krauss guy.

[Anonymous No.16365481]

>>16365465
>uber empiricist
>faith
something doesn't add up

[Anonymous No.16365497]

>>16365481
Faith in the primary principle that one can only find knowledge through empirical means.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16365504]

>>16365465
>you can’t just know stuff! Ya kent!!

>>16365470
>Yup. Qanon says he had cheese pizza. Every. Single. Time

>>16365481
Schizophrenia

[Anonymous No.16365509]

>>16365481
>>16365497
and also faith in those responsible for collecting said knowledge. Their methods etc.
The "empirical data" becomes the ministry of truth. Unquestionable in its authority even though these "truths" are brought to us by fellow subjective and fallible creatures.

[Anonymous No.16365514]

>>16365497
that isn't faith. it's impractical to be that skeptical.

[Anonymous No.16365518]

>>16365504
Butters. You're smarter than this. I know you are. Please don't be so obtuse. Actually read what I said.

[Anonymous No.16365527]

>>16365504

[Anonymous No.16365538]

>>16365514
Logical Positivism is gay

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16365542]

>>16365518
You’re all named anonymous

[Anonymous No.16365543]

>>16365538
be more practical and you won't be so confused on the matter

[Anonymous No.16365567]

>>16365514
It's necessary. Otherwise you're trading religion for the state religion. The religion of what is claimed to be verified. Complete blind trust in the capacity for scientists to be entirely objective. Trust in the subject's capacity to be objective.
>it's impractical to be that skeptical
This implies that you think I'm saying we adopt another extreme. The extreme of ultimate skepticism. Not what I'm saying.
If you're skeptical of religion be skeptical of science too. That's what science is. Trial and error. Some widely accepted facts are scientific error yet to be discovered.
>>16365542
>>16365465

[Anonymous No.16365607]

>>16365567
it's not necessary to be that impractical dude. if you're skeptical even of your ability to observe and gather linear data then you can't operate in the world at all and that benefits no one. but adhering to what you can observe and rejecting what you can't and strictly referring to demonstrated empirical data is practical and useful, and has no need for faith in the practical application of such a mindset.

[Anonymous No.16365613]

I believe westerner men should be allowed to use africa as their pleasure continent, with no limitations.

[Anonymous No.16365637]

>>16365607
No one is saying that science shouldn't be used to find answers about the natural world. Instead, I am skeptical of the notion that science is the absolute truth of reality without dealing with metaphysical questions.

[Anonymous No.16365651]

>>16365637
absolute truth is not anything an empiricist would be concerned with because such a notion is impractical

[Anonymous No.16365668]

>>16365607
Yes it is. This is the scientific method. If you want to be truly scientific and not just a slave to the empirical data of the day you have to question it.
When you do not question "fact" as brought to you by the fellow subjective individual even under the guise of authority you have become its slave.
>if you're skeptical even of your ability to observe and gather linear data then you can't operate in the world
I am skeptical of the subject's ability to be purely objective. I am skeptical of others' motives. I am skeptical of methods.
I am skeptical of putting blind trust in any one authority. Whether that authority is God or the State is irrelevant.
Empiricism is not lie proof, it is not fault proof.

[Anonymous No.16365677]

>>16365651
>absolute truth is not anything an empiricist would be concerned with...

you sure?

[Anonymous No.16365742]

>>16365668
the scientific method doesn't deal with facts and doesn't posit the subject's measuring as objective. learn what empiricism is really about please.

>>16365677
yes. you don't understand empiricism if you think so.

[Anonymous No.16365836]

>>16365742
This is a blatant lie.
This is a twisting of the conversation and a refusal to address the core issue of what I'm saying.
You are using the tyranny of language and semantic definition in a refusal to hear what I am saying.
>learn what empiricism is really about please

Thread after thread. Debate after debate. Post after post. What is heard?
>can I get a source on that
The empirical has become the religious. The authority of the stat unquestioned.
The objectivity of the subject is the new God.
The ones who claim rationality, reason and the real for themselves. They become the authority on truth.
>>16365365
Look at the picture.
We know nothing of who was surveyed. We know nothing of the nuance of their beliefs. We know nothing of the surveyors. Yet the empiricist collects his numbers and produces his own subjective interpretation of the 'facts'.

[Anonymous No.16365861]

>>16365836
nothing you are talking about has anything to do with empiricism. the scientism cult? not empiricists. if you think the scientific method deals with facts, then you know as much as the cultists do.

[Anonymous No.16365872]

>>16365861
Is this a word game to you?

[Anonymous No.16365891]

>>16365872
what author says that scientific method deals with facts? scientific theories are not factual. this is common knowledge, or at least i thought it was.

[Anonymous No.16365963]

>>16365891
>can I get a source on that
>what author says that scientific method deals with facts?

>the scientism cult? not empiricists
>You are using the tyranny of language and semantic definition
You agree they exist. You know they wear the guise of the rational, the empiricist, the reasonable, the scientific, the real.
The dissent is labeled irrational, schizophrenic, unscientific.
>>16365365

>Is this a word game to you?

[Anonymous No.16366037]

>>16365963
please note that i wasn't defending that guy. what this chain started with was me pointing out the discrepancy in the post claiming that an "uber empiricist" operates on faith. they aren't an empiricist if that's the case.

[Anonymous No.16366063]

I just realized that your entire reason for having a trip is probably some retarded shit about sticking to your own egoist principles against the opinion of the herd.

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » !!oI3er5KKetj No.16366076]

>>16365836
Surveys are always taken as generalizations.

[Anonymous No.16366182]

>>16353589
sex makes you weak and dwelling on sexual urges weakens you too

[Anonymous No.16366183]

>>16366037
Picking single words out of context and applying a different meaning (with no regard to intent or context) is a waste of time.
It poisons the well and devolves into a semantics/labels debate.

[Anonymous No.16366313]

>>16366076
It isn't just surveys.
Stats, scientific "data" etc. can be manipulated and misinterpreted. Methods used can be faulty and variables can be left unaccounted for.
You posted a quote from Sapolsky in which he claimed the rational. The intelligent. The wise. The informed. The superior. For himself. The numbers in the study were labeled the irrationals. The ones who shouldn't be voting. The inferior.
The statists and the self proclaimed rationals claim the objective and the real for themselves. The subject's ability to be objective held in highest regard. An impossible and irrational esteem is given to the subject's capability for objectivity.
The empiricist/statist appeal to authority is hinged on the competence and objectivity of the subjective individual(s) responsible for gathering, reporting and interpreting the data.
The nuance is lost in the human statistic.

[Anonymous No.16366320]

>>16353589
Me on the left.

[Anonymous No.16367721]

>>16366183
that wasn't a semantics argument. it's flat out wrong to say empiricism has anything to do with faith.

[Anonymous No.16367760]

I realized 1hour ago that women cannot be asexual.
Women love sex and love to desire sex.

Men love sex but they do not love much nor dislike much the desire for sex. In fact the desire for sex is more like an hindrance and a thing to eject, precisely by wanking and ejaculation that is the pinnacle of fucking a slag.
men still despise not loving sex, since it removes the most effective mechanism of valuation that they have, which leads them to the usual mockery of being shagless didlos remaingin on the shelf, being baby dicks and being asexual.
Men despise asexuality in men since it shows them to be far less dominant than the story they plays in their heads

Women despise asexuality in men, since the few asexual men (very few are handsome) no longer acknowledge women for sex nor for companionship. Some asexual men claim to still want a gf just to cuddle, but that's already a baby-level sex and we are still in the situation of validation (and the gf still wants sex anyway sooner or later) and once they have sex with a girl they love they see sex is not so bad.

Women despise asexuality in women, precisely because women live on sex while their hate of their body for menstruating leads them to take pills which kills their desire for sex (but indeed kills their menstruation). They hate their life since through their own body, they acknowledge in their intimacy that they cannot win on both accounts: either have a comfy life or have an erotic life. Women want the erotic life.

[Anonymous No.16367806]

>>16367721

[Anonymous No.16367820]

>>16367806
can a higher, better understanding of a concept never be reached through study and contemplation? is that the case you're making? your understanding of empiricism is uneducated normalfag tier if it assumes scientists (empiricists) consider their observations and conclusions as factual, and it's uneducated pseud tier if it assumes that there is an unconscious faith behind it. why perpetuate nonsense when it's wrong? why not learn something?

[Anonymous No.16367842]

>>16367820
it never ends