Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
New Server | HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info forum | HOMM4: info forum | HOMM5: info forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Other Side of the Monitor > Thread: Sex and drugs
Thread: Sex and drugs This thread is 8 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 · «PREV / NEXT»
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
HC SUPPORTER
posted February 05, 2009 02:53 AM

Quote:
One is a mental-state, aka brain-state, aka stuff that comes from your brain, aka I do not know how to explain this more straightforward than this. The other (pleasure) is a body-state, substances that get IN YOUR BRAIN (whatever, metaphorically), to attempt to control it.
So the brain isn't in the body? I learn something new every day.

Quote:
Pleasure is when your reason does not "work" as expected, or you are not fully conscious.
Pleasure is when you feel good. Period.

Quote:
He will, at first, but later not -- after he becomes a junkie for example, he may lose his job.
So he shouldn't use it to the point where he would lose his job, then! What about WoW? Would you make that illegal as well?
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Lith-Maethor
Lith-Maethor


Honorable
Legendary Hero
paid in Coin and Cleavage
posted February 05, 2009 03:44 AM

*sighs*

i planned to respond to any of your claims in proper form, citing sources and bringing philosophy, biology and a few more areas into the mix, each refuting your points profoundly... but i think i will go with the suggestion of a 'roo eating friend and say that you need to shrug off the guilt and explore what your sexuality is (if you have any) ...or in other words...

"you need to get laid"
____________
Dreams of Darkness nWoD IRC Chronicle, set in Edinburgh

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TitaniumAlloy
TitaniumAlloy


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
posted February 05, 2009 08:04 AM

Quote:
Pleasure is when your reason does not "work" as expected, or you are not fully conscious.


LOL i dno who wrote this but....... ????????
____________
John says to live above hell.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
TitaniumAlloy
TitaniumAlloy


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
posted February 05, 2009 08:05 AM

Kids; don't buy drugs.



Become a rockstar: they give you them for free.
____________
John says to live above hell.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
JollyJoker
JollyJoker


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
posted February 05, 2009 09:26 AM

I don't think you are right, Death. Since it seems to be the wish of people here not to be too scientific, I'll explain it with an example.
Bipolar disorder os a mental disorder where people have an emotional rollercoaster ride switching between high and low, between maniacally feeling good and deep depression. In most cases the reason seems to be a genetical defect located at the genes that guide serotonine, dopamine and other body substance regulation.
I agree with mvass, that the distinction between brain and body is arbitrary and useless. The little chem lab within our body KNOWS what it's doing and it's the brain that delivers the sensory input that will put it into action.

As discussed in another thread it looks like nature intended the human to develop a brain able to react on the actual surroundings and situations and that includes overriding instincts (until then it was the other way round). That is consistent with what we see. We don't HAVE to have sex instinctively; we can kill ourselves.

The stuff our body is producing is tailor-made for us and fulfills a certain purpose. Adrenaline is, for example, of course a "drug" - and there are know adrenaline junkies -, but that hasn't got anything to do with the drug as such, but instead with habit-forming and the reasons for that one which we can discuss, but which don't have anything to do with the drug as such, but only with the MIND (and it's disorders and disfunctions).

What you demand is that there shouldn't be no substances, but why is there a difference between substances that are losed because of sensory input and sensory input as such? Is there even a difference? People are hooked by the silver screen as well which seems to be based on sensory input alone, but do you really think that someone watching TV willingly 16 hours per day is better off than someone having willingly sex for sex's sake.

Lastly you completely ignore the fact that sex is a communicational sensory experience as well - it means getting close to each other in a very primal way and it's a very solid thing.
You can test it, by the way. Should you ever wake up from a really bad nightmare in the middle of the night, the brain or conscious mind is only so good in telling you that everything is in order and you just had some terrible nightmare. What is working a hell of a lot better than the brain in that situation is the presence of a primevally know body near you, you can just cling to. That one is reassuringly real, warm and soft and good-bye nightmare.

So, the body is NOT brain's enemy who wants to control it: after all it's all directed by the brain itself. Sensory input is necessary for the body to react, and that is processed by the brain.
Secondly, natural, that is TAILOR-MADE "drugs" are no problem as such, since they don't have bad side-effects. Any habitual effects are not caused by the drug but by mental disorders and problems. This has something to do with how a habit os formed.
As a sidenote, while the reasons for mental habit-forming are the same, no matter the drug, not tailor- but MAN-made drugs may of course have bad side-effects on the organism.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TitaniumAlloy
TitaniumAlloy


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
posted February 05, 2009 10:27 AM

Maybe thoughts have no influence on our actions but rather are a byproduct of them



Think about that one...
____________
John says to live above hell.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Doomforge
Doomforge


Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
posted February 05, 2009 12:38 PM

Quote:
Doomforge:

And there's a mistake in your graph - in the sex portion. The periods in between sex should not decrease in pleasure. It's just the peaks that should decrease (and even not necessarily so!).


Trust me, after two times in a row, the third one is a) less pleasurable b) the climax is much weaker. Unless you're some kind of sex-god who doesn't get affected even after ten consecutive times of getting laid. But a common person WILL get a decrease of the quality of sex each time after the first, assuming he does it in a row.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
HC SUPPORTER
posted February 05, 2009 02:47 PM

Perhaps (but I'm not sure about that). However, the periods in between sex should not decrease in pleasure.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
DeadMan
DeadMan


Known Hero
The True Humanitarian
posted February 05, 2009 04:03 PM

Now, of course there's nothing wrong with sex, so long as it's done in marriage. Certainly it can be a great celebration of the relationship when done with one's spouse. On the other hand, fornication is wrong because it is the search for crass animalistic pleasure. It's absolutely selfish and immmoral.

As for drugs - they're only crass animalistic pleasure and are never a celebration of life. It is good that drugs are illegal, because, too often, people don't know what's good for them. That's why some compulsion is necessary. Of course, this compulsion would improve general welfare, because people don't always serve society. Not only are they not always rational, but when they're rational, they pursue their selfish interests with no regard for the greater society which makes everything possible. So the State and/or religion should step in.
____________
I don't matter. You don't matter. But we matter.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | PP | Quote Reply | Link
Doomforge
Doomforge


Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
posted February 05, 2009 04:12 PM

Yeah, cause pleasure is sooooo baaaaaaad.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
vahleeb
vahleeb


Hired Hero
posted February 05, 2009 04:39 PM

Hello everybody (I'm in my first days posting, I think I'll say that into every first post of every thread for the next month),

Just a few things of the top of my head.

In my opinion, you cannot compare sex and drugs. If you were indeed to compare them, then please state that the physical effects of sex are right about there with an aspirin. I believe somebody should look into the way sex impacts the brain and the way drugs do. You'll see it's a very different thing.

I would agree with the OP and say that I'm also for full legalization. Just slap a huge Surgeon General's Warning on them (we have the most disgusting things on cigarette packs in Europe nowadays) and tax the heck out of transactions. It would sure help kick us out of the recession . On the other hand, forcing this stuff on people without their consent should be punishable by law. And I don't just mean drugs, I mean alcohol and smoking too. It's somewhat similar to rape if you will.

As far as the low periods... These are called withdrawals. Drugs have them. Basically the organism is so incapable of producing a normal response because of the over-stimulation that it goes the other way. (Have you ever put your finger in a bowl of water so hot that it felt cold for a second? ) Sex... I dunno. I don't think it has withdrawals like that. If you do manage to climax 10 times in a row (god bless the blue pill), I don't think the last one will be any less than the previous ones. I think the actual problem is that you will pass out from the effort. Also, you might categorize withdrawal as being unable to perform again after climaxing. But it's different than drugs because there the organism goes into reverse i.e. pain mode, here it just goes into neutral.

If i had to choose between sex and drugs for pleasure purposes only. Drugs would win by far. For health reasons however, I'm gonna stick to sex.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
JollyJoker
JollyJoker


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
posted February 05, 2009 05:08 PM

hi vahleeb.

I just stumbled upon another good thing about religious fundamentalism, reading the last posts: you have the pleasure and privilege to use such strong, resounding language.

I mean, "fornication" and "crass animalistic behaviour", aren't those words summoning vivid images of Sodom and Las Ve... err, Gomorrha, and how people there indulge in all that animalistic beh... umm, well, you get the drift, I suppose.
How shallow, then, sounds "great celebration of the relationship", I mean that is much paler in comparison, drab even.
I mean, why do even the words describing evil sound more interesting than those describing good?  

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TheDeath
TheDeath


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
posted February 05, 2009 08:04 PM

Quote:
So the brain isn't in the body? I learn something new every day.
Mvass, it was what I said... of course, you can substitute it with "body, except brain" everywhere you encounter "body" in my posts. Why should communication always be a burden on our discussions?

Quote:
Pleasure is when you feel good. Period.
Yeah great, wonderful scientific explanation, guess by that logic you can't analyze when someone feels pleasure, since he has to tell you that he feels good -- thus it is subjective (he could lie), right?

Quote:
"you need to get laid"
Excellent philosophical argument, I'm deeply impressed

You could as well say that only people who have troubles with digestive system don't practice cannibalism, or that only people who don't have a syringe don't take drugs...

Buddy, you need to cut your arm -- you have NO idea how good you'll feel, just trust me...


@JJ: I will comment on one quote as a whole to avoid quote-wars (but reply to main points). For example:
Quote:
The stuff our body is producing is tailor-made for us and fulfills a certain purpose.
Yes exactly, nature is made to mind-control our conscious. I didn't claim otherwise. For example, our ancestors had little reason (I'm talking from an evolutionary POV ofc, and about the species we evolved from, doesn't matter which it was!) -- so how could nature guarantee the survival? With few reason, and without those substances/pleasure, they would not have sex -- they would find it POINTLESS. Since they couldn't reason that they would go extinct, they didn't care. Thus nature had to use an "override" switch so it can ensure their survival.

notice however that by that logic, nature designed pleasure for reproduction and for survival EXCLUSIVELY -- nature doesn't make "bigger, tougher species" it simply makes "species that can SURVIVE in their environment". This is the sole factor which it determines whether to go one direction or not. We could just as well become smaller and smaller, if for example, our big sizes (and big muscles) aren't used, as seen today compared to our ancestors --> why waste energy when now it's enough? (because of our artificial environments for example)

Nature bases solely on reproduction. Now, this pleasure can be observed anywhere (and "pain" or whatever, being the opposite of it, as much as you think it is not): starving, makes you feel pain so you go and EAT to SURVIVE.

something tastes good? (aka pleasure). well, it means you can eat it safely. (unfortunately, nature didn't perfect it so it's still flawed here)

reproduction feels good? go and do it. SURVIVE.

But here's where it falls apart. Nature did not give us condoms, for example. If you use pleasure, which is NATURE's way of making you do something, as a goal, then it means you at least have some natural goal -- that would be REPRODUCTION. But you don't, this is where the fallacy comes. Since when I say "sex" I mean non-reproductive sex obviously.

That pleasure is, logically (and evolutionary) speaking, useless. It has no goal. EVERY PLEASURE HAS A GOAL, pleasure itself is NOT the goal of nature. Behind EVERY pleasure you will find a goal that nature intended it for you.

If you argue that we shouldn't be following nature (and I agree), then heads up: pleasure is NATURE's way of making you do something. It is not your way.

And the line between body/mind is easily drawn, as long as you think of mind as 'conscious'.

As for the body being brain's enemy -- it may or may not be, depending on what YOU choose. if you let "the flow" go with 100% natural instincts, then you would go and procreate (pleasure is bonus, after all, to make you "do it").

Imagine the shark experiment again: we are the "programmers" that tell it where to go. He doesn't want. What do we do? We send pleasure along the way. He goes. If he has strong will (which he doesn't) he may CHOOSE. So the shark, let's say, chooses not to (hypothetically speaking). What do we say? Well, nothing, it's like our MESSAGE (aka pleasure) to him just gets ignored (i.e he ignores what we TELL HIM, and refuses to "hear us").

But we don't do that of course, in sex case, since we do listen to the "pleasure" but not to it's goal behind.

Still people may also have sex out of reason for reproduction even if there's no motivation apart from reason ALONE.


Of course the brain sends the signals to the chemicals to be released. That is the subconscious (I already stated: when I say "brain" I mean conscious brain/state!), and it will try to shut down the conscious.

as for "strong" words (no, I'm NOT even using ONE single religious arguments "against sex" myself ):

Because sex is similar to drugs, both in physical and social effects. It places primitive instincts higher than intellect, a human being - a sentient being - turns into a primitive animal.

This even describes what a human being is and how it is different than an 'primitive animal'. Powerful words? I dunno, but you can come up with something better if you find it?


Quote:
In my opinion, you cannot compare sex and drugs. If you were indeed to compare them, then please state that the physical effects of sex are right about there with an aspirin. I believe somebody should look into the way sex impacts the brain and the way drugs do. You'll see it's a very different thing.
Yes you can since there are many neurochemicals and other substances released during and prior to sex.

Besides, I find it really puzzling that we can make computers, which by definition do not have "pleasure", and we are closer to understanding logic & reason by them as a "model" to look at, and we even KNOW that sex is used for reproduction (otherwise, nature would have given us easy controls and/or condoms for "accidental pregnancies" don't you think?), but we still refuse to shatter this belief of pleasure and defend it to our deaths, in some cases, even if our lives depended on it.

I may draw a parallel with a religious fanatic that clings to his own "beliefs" (which are, pleasure, to him at least), but that will incite this debate too deep.

BTW: Science discovers the physiological value of Continence (whatever)
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
JollyJoker
JollyJoker


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
posted February 05, 2009 08:44 PM

It's easier with quotes, here we go:
Quote:

Thus nature had to use an "override" switch so it can ensure their survival.
Nature could have used a more forceful override forceful switch: PAIN. And, no, by logic can you conclude that nature designed pleasure exclusively for reproduction. A LOT more probably is that pleasure was picked instead of pain to bind mom and dad to take care of each other and their offspring. Because otherwise, simple and clear, males would just fight for the right to have sex as animals do.
Which negates every point you make up to
Quote:
That pleasure is, logically (and evolutionary) speaking, useless.
If you argue that we shouldn't be following nature (and I agree), then heads up: pleasure is NATURE's way of making you do something. It is not your way.

You can bet your brain on that it is my way. With life and nature having enough unpleasant ways, what's wrong with grabbing for the pleasant ones?
By the way, we had this discussion already. Pleasure is not overriding your brain. You may chose to let it happen - and if it's an act of love it's an act of ultimate and intimate trust as well, by the way.
And, incidentally, you seem to think that nature is rather ingenious on one hand, designing this wonderful human brain with the capabilities to override every safety catch nature put in in case that gadget doesn't work as good yet, but is on the other hand to stupid to check what that means for pleasure and sex. I think, that (and look above for another reason), sex has more purposes than just reproduction - in fact the notion it would just be for reproduction  diminishes nature to the same bleak, drab and unimaginative sods all those pious antipleasure misguideds are.
Oh, and (man-made) drugs work completely different - they don't have anything to do ith pleasure.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
william
william


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
posted February 05, 2009 09:52 PM

Quote:
Perhaps (but I'm not sure about that). However, the periods in between sex should not decrease in pleasure.


That's right. The longer you wait before having sex, then it will be more pleasurable.
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Doomforge
Doomforge


Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
posted February 05, 2009 09:53 PM

Those aren't periods between sex on the graph. It's assumed sex is constant. The peak of the graph = climax. Easy as pie.

Otherwise, it would drop to 0 pleasure afterwards, obviously.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
HC SUPPORTER
posted February 05, 2009 10:39 PM
Edited by mvassilev at 22:40, 05 Feb 2009.

TheDeath:
Quote:
Mvass, it was what I said... of course, you can substitute it with "body, except brain" everywhere you encounter "body" in my posts. Why should communication always be a burden on our discussions?
But you can't really make that distinction, because there is more than one way to get pleasure - sometimes from the brain acting on itself, sometimes autonomically, etc. Chemicals can come from different areas, but they may all produce pleasure - although in different circumstances. Thus, it doesn't make any difference where the pleasure comes from - what makes the difference is the quality of pleasure.

Quote:
Yeah great, wonderful scientific explanation, guess by that logic you can't analyze when someone feels pleasure, since he has to tell you that he feels good -- thus it is subjective (he could lie), right?
What does him lying have to do with anything? You feel pleasure when you feel good, not when you say that you feel good.

And we may partially abandon nature's way so we can get more pleasure - but not for any other purpose. Remember that it is nature that gave us our dexterous hands and creative mind.

Doomforge:
Quote:
It's assumed sex is constant.
That's one heck of an assumption.

And you have to look at the periods in between sex/drug use, because that's a key component. With sex, the periods in between stay the same. With drugs, they get worse.

DeadMan:
People don't know what's good for them? And you do? Dictator much?
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TheDeath
TheDeath


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
posted February 05, 2009 10:39 PM
Edited by TheDeath at 22:41, 05 Feb 2009.

Quote:
Nature could have used a more forceful override forceful switch: PAIN. And, no, by logic can you conclude that nature designed pleasure exclusively for reproduction. A LOT more probably is that pleasure was picked instead of pain to bind mom and dad to take care of each other and their offspring. Because otherwise, simple and clear, males would just fight for the right to have sex as animals do.
Why? They have no reason to fight, if there's no pleasure in that action, no satisfaction, etc...

and what do you mean with pain? Pain is used to REPEL things, but it is very related to pleasure. Something tastes bad? Then don't eat it -- at least nature thinks so (it's wrong sometimes). Something hurts? That's bad. (although, this is ONE example of irrationality: when you are under surgery, for example).

Pleasure is to make you think "I want that", i.e desire. Not sure what's so hard. Domination is only used as long as you have a desire to do so -- without pleasure, you can bet animals wouldn't fight at all (and neither reproduce though, a bad point, since they're not rational).

Quote:
You can bet your brain on that it is my way. With life and nature having enough unpleasant ways, what's wrong with grabbing for the pleasant ones?
By the way, we had this discussion already. Pleasure is not overriding your brain. You may chose to let it happen - and if it's an act of love it's an act of ultimate and intimate trust as well, by the way.
That's like saying "telling psychic X (mind controller) to control my brain (he respects your wish)" means that you aren't mind-controlled because you did the choice? Or that you allowed him or told him to do it?

Quote:
And, incidentally, you seem to think that nature is rather ingenious on one hand, designing this wonderful human brain with the capabilities to override every safety catch nature put in in case that gadget doesn't work as good yet, but is on the other hand to stupid to check what that means for pleasure and sex.
Well yes, a conscious brain practically is against nature's ideals, in a certain way. For example, animals can't really destroy an ecosystem & balance by themselves (they'll always starve if they overpopulate). Humans can blast a few nukes very easily though. It is obvious that we are "above nature" in some cases, because we can shape it and break its "balance" (not that it's always a bad thing, I'm NOT going into THAT subject here).

Quote:
I think, that (and look above for another reason), sex has more purposes than just reproduction - in fact the notion it would just be for reproduction  diminishes nature to the same bleak, drab and unimaginative sods all those pious antipleasure misguideds are.
Oh, and (man-made) drugs work completely different - they don't have anything to do ith pleasure.
Drugs are related, but the difference is that they are external substances (rather than produced by your body). If we were to genetically engineer humans, you can bet drugs would be part of our bodies, for example, if we were designed to be so (not sure why but meh).

If it has more purposes then, why do you have to STOP NATURE with, e.g: a condom? Ever thought about that? Why have "accidents" in the first place? If it was so nature's way, then you wouldn't mind accidents -- after all, they would all be natural.

Again, every pleasure has a goal behind it. This is the most straightforward logic (I could even suggest Occam's Razor here, for the sex/reproduction thing). The goal of pleasure of sex? Reproduction. The goal of pleasure from taste? To eat healthy food (what nature considers so, though, it isn't perfect). Pleasure from ANYTHING has a GOAL behind it. Therefore it is clear that pleasure as a goal is not nature's way. And it isn't reason's way either.

Look at it like this: there are people who don't experience any pleasure from sex. They still love each other though, they aren't emotionless robots. Now, the ONLY reason they have sex is if they want kids. Logically, evolutionary speaking, what makes you think the pleasure is used for?
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
HC SUPPORTER
posted February 05, 2009 10:47 PM

Quote:
The goal of pleasure of sex? Reproduction. The goal of pleasure from taste? To eat healthy food (what nature considers so, though, it isn't perfect). Pleasure from ANYTHING has a GOAL behind it. Therefore it is clear that pleasure as a goal is not nature's way. And it isn't reason's way either.
The first part is true but irrelevant. However, pleasure as a goal may not be "nature"'s goal, but it is the individual's goal. The individual wants to survive (obviously), but in many cases he is motivated by the pleasure - thus, pleasure is his goal. And with reason, we can pursue that pleasure better.

Feels good, man.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
TheDeath
TheDeath


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
posted February 05, 2009 10:59 PM
Edited by TheDeath at 23:00, 05 Feb 2009.

Quote:
However, pleasure as a goal may not be "nature"'s goal, but it is the individual's goal. The individual wants to survive (obviously), but in many cases he is motivated by the pleasure - thus, pleasure is his goal. And with reason, we can pursue that pleasure better.
Let me put this differently because it's similar to what I said

It is not nature's goal. It is not reason's goal either. (that would be, for example, knowledge for the sake of it, yes indeed there ARE people like that).

So this "individual's" goal is pretty distorted/twisted. After all, it's not his reason. It's not nature's either... It's as pointless as it can get. (might I add, even more "primitive" than nature/instincts themselves! after all, they are lower on the stage on the pointless scale --> reason being at top, I don't think you can argue that it develops stuff and understands them much FASTER than nature, while this 'goal' of yours is STAGNANT, the worst of all)

Quote:
Feels good, man.
Tell that to asexuals. What do you think they do instead? Seek other forms of pleasure?

My point is, every junkie thinks that drugs are good, but you have to step out (aka be deprived of those hormones/substances/drugs/whatever) to actually see other goals.

Bah it's pretty pointless to discuss to be honest, because even though there are indeed people, what do I try to point out? That some people like rationality/knowledge/wisdom/art more than others? (and seek it as a goal, for example). That some are junkies and some aren't?

It's pretty pointless if I look at it --> after all, I will probably have more chances talking to an actual junkie (after all, at least that's not built-in so they were addicted for shorter periods). And the bad thing is that I can't particularly convince any junkie anywhere (especially not on the internet) when he says "man, you need to get a dose and see fer yerself man! awesome stuff!"

Ok, let's make a deal: I get a dose if you agree to be deprived of them and "see for yourself how it is without them" as well (I actually mean, completely depriving you and becoming asexual ). Deal?
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 8 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0941 seconds