/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12462593]

Are there any books, fiction or non-fiction, which propose that sex and sexual urges are something inherently "evil" or worthy of being suppressed and ignored?

The older I get, the more I observe sex to be the motivating force behind various aspects of society, especially those I find loathsome. I also have a lingering suspicion that sexual urges themselves, especially when consummated or allowed to serve as a dominant influence on one's behaviour / outlook, are somehow more trouble than they are worth.

Any thoughts on this in general?

Not trolling by the way.

[Anonymous No.12462606]

>>12462593
not sure about books but nearly all major spiritual paths advocate that libido must be contained for one to attain spiritual transcendence

[Anonymous No.12462610]

>>12462593
sex is the means by which life propagates itself and life is completely horrific in its ruthless darwininan logic

[Anonymous No.12462615]

>>12462606
Are there any non-religious books which are hostile to sexuality?

I know Zappfe condemns recreation, as do various other anti-natalists, but I haven't seen any who specifically condemn sexuality also.

[Anonymous No.12462617]

>>12462606
and to add, sorry, i agree with them completely and i encourage you to control such forces within yourself so that you can attain to the higher states of consciousness which libido prevents you from reaching.

[Anonymous No.12462631]

They wouldn't call sex "evil", but usually the Classical philosophers considered that sexual desire was something that should not rule you. That being ruled by your base desires would be bad for yourself.

[Anonymous No.12462649]

>>12462615
Epicurus was celibate. The Stoics, Platonists and Aristotelians would obviously also not agree with modern sexual hedonism, but they were more religious (their arguments against hedonism were not religious, usually).

[Anonymous No.12462667]

>>12462593
I just realized I lost all my Harriet pics the other day I formatted my computer. Fuck. She's a niche waifu so I doubt anyone else have them and her mom deleted her veils instagram.

[Anonymous No.12462695]

>>12462593
i'm not religious but i find catholic girls to be so cute.

>tfw no qt chaste gf who will practise celibacy with me

[Anonymous No.12462702]

>>12462593
my ex's diary desu

[Anonymous No.12462706]

>>12462593
but societies that regulate sexuality the most are objectively more "evil", all the new energy ends up being sublimated into technology which gets used for war as you see in the history of the West or middle east
it's either sex or war

[Anonymous No.12462724]

>>12462593
pic related is really good

[Anonymous No.12462733]

>>12462706
>it's either sex or war

I'll have both, but mostly war please

[Anonymous No.12462734]

>>12462593

The Gospel of Thomas.

>He who knows the father and the mother will be called the son of a harlot.

[Anonymous No.12462756]

>>12462734
Also the acts of Paul and Thecla, and to a lesser degree Paul's letters. Christianity in general holds that abstinence is better than sex.

[Anonymous No.12462778]

>>12462606
first post worst post

>>12462593
Sex is for the purpose of creating new life. Let there be no confusion about that. Sex = pregnancy and new children. It is only by artificial means that we obstruct nature from completing the process, and thus have transformed sex into a low, commercial transaction and women into commercial ventures attached to a vagina and outward characteristics of sexual attractiveness, artificial or not.

Sex is 100% good and beautiful inside of the sacrament of marriage. Period. End of.

Outside of marriage, sex is neurotic. An expression of personal failure in the man and women who participate in it. Sex this way is something desired by people who don't know what they actually want, but who are looking for it here anyway because they have rejected traditional roles but they are still subject to their hormones. Anyone who denies this is mentally ill, corrupted by capitalism and agencies in western culture that benefit from the commodification of sex.

[Anonymous No.12462791]

>>12462756
Abstinence is fine, if committed to a purpose. Typically the chaste has dedicated themselves to God, prayer and philosophy in all hours. This leaves no room for a woman and children.

Love for God is better than no love for God, yes. But marriage and fatherhood also fulfills God's commands. Pick a path. They're both good.

[Anonymous No.12462802]

>>12462778
lol i only said that true spiritual aspirants remain chaste, wasn't referring to ordinary people

[Anonymous No.12462812]

>>12462778
I agree 100% with your post and I'm not even religious. It's hard to find girls in my position, not religious for religious girls and non religious girls are not wife material.

[Anonymous No.12462817]

>>12462802
>implying ordinary people aren't on a spiritual path

[Anonymous No.12462828]

>>12462812
>wherein anon realizes he was made for praising God
I hope you go to church soon anon.

[Anonymous No.12462830]

>>12462817
"true spiritual aspirants" i.e those who dedicate themselves to it entirely

[Anonymous No.12462841]

>>12462791
>Now for the matters you wrote about: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” 2 But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband

1 Corinthians 7:1-2

[Anonymous No.12462863]

>>12462841
context? what matters? you're leaving a shitload out.

[Anonymous No.12462884]

>>12462778
>Sex is for the purpose of creating new life.
That theory fails to explain sexual stimulation outside of the context of potential reproductive situations... which is I presume the predominate mode of what people are doing today globally.

>Sex is 100% good and beautiful inside of the sacrament of marriage
99.99999% of all sex occurring in nature then is bad.

>Outside of marriage, sex is neurotic
Nice invented psychiatric definition, even if you could get an expert committee to agree you're just dealing made up mumbo jumbo.

>Anyone who denies this is mentally ill, corrupted by capitalism and agencies in western culture that benefit from the commodification of sex.
Anti-scientific muh feels variety of avoiding reality. Most governments today still actively criminalize the actual commodification of sex.

[Anonymous No.12462889]

>>12462778
>Sex is for the purpose of creating new life.
Stopped reading there.

[Anonymous No.12462891]

>>12462863
We don't have the letter of the Corinthians to Paul but what he replied is pretty straightforward. Can you think of a question that would have that answer that would change the meaning of his reply?

[Anonymous No.12462904]

>>12462889
You should have kept reading. I diagnosed exactly what is wrong with you.

>>12462884
>That theory fails to explain sexual stimulation outside of the context of potential reproductive situations
Your inability to detect the difference between humans and bonobos is not my fault.

>99.99999% of all sex occurring in nature then is bad.
Again, you are forgetting that we are the only species that can reason.

The rest of your post is illiterate trash. You're a communist sex worker, aren't you.

[Anonymous No.12462914]

>>12462889
>I diagnosed exactly what is wrong with you.
Really? Over the internet? I'm an antinatalist.

[Anonymous No.12462926]

>>12462891
Yes, there are some conditions that might persuade men from having sex with women. If she's married to someone else. Or a slave. Or pregnant. Or diseased. It's not hard to imagine.

Regardless, I would admit sexual relations between man and woman are dangerous and consequential, and should not be entered lightly. Paul was not a gnostic or antinatalist, however.

[Anonymous No.12462940]

>>12462904
>Your inability to detect the difference between humans and bonobos is not my fault.
Please elaborate. Humans and bonobos are both sexual animals. There's differences but we both have a sex drive.

>Again, you are forgetting that we are the only species that can reason.
You claim we're the only species that can "reason" but you don't fully define what you mean by that... who's to say dolphins can't... let alone aliens?

[Anonymous No.12462943]

>>12462828
Oh, I've tried exploring religion. But logic gets in the way: I can't see any proof or evidence for any religion. At the same time I rebuke fellow nonreligious people, especially people on /r/atheism, who reject what religion was protecting and espouse liberal values. I'm sure science can one day back traditional values, and I'm on to reading The Moral Landscape to see if there is an answer. I'm also looking to reading Confessions just because I agree so much with Judeo-Christian values.

[Anonymous No.12462962]

>>12462926
>Yes, there are some conditions that might persuade men from having sex with women. If she's married to someone else. Or a slave. Or pregnant. Or diseased. It's not hard to imagine
Yeah, but that doesn't fit what he said in his letter. He says it is good not to have sex with a woman. No caveats about married, diseased, a slave (lots of early Christians were slaves BTW). Then he says if you Must have sex, do it in marriage only.

Another quote frome later in the letter:
>(7) I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that.
>(8) Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am.
>(9) But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion

[Anonymous No.12462977]

>>12462940
>Please elaborate.
Read the rest of the post. Dolphins don't reason as we do. They are intelligent, but we don't know that they discuss philosophy. Humans are unique in that way.

[Anonymous No.12463014]

>>12462791
>But marriage and fatherhood also fulfills God's commands
This is a relatively new development (20th century) desu

[Anonymous No.12463021]

>>12462943
Read Aristotle and Aquinas. Feser's book of proofs would interest you.

>>12462962
>Yeah, but that doesn't fit what he said in his letter. He says it is good not to have sex with a woman. No caveats about married...
You asked for examples, dolt. Paul opened with a line that indicated he was answering a question with a known circumstance, the specifics of which are unknown.

That said, Paul's opinions on marriage are not law. He was converted after the resurrection. I don't see why you give a fuck what he says, especially as he agrees with me. Those who burn with passion should marry. Those who are better suited to spiritual life should pursue that if it is their will.

[wild lit gf boy No.12463028]

>>12462593
This is good advice for anyone that's under 23: whatever weird, incomprehensible things you see older people do, from switching their interests away from fun/art/beauty toward money or ridiculously expensive cars: it's all about sex. So is men trying to be extra manly. It's sex. They're looking to attract the women that are into masculinity.

Oscar Wilde's got it:

Everything in the world is about sex except sex. Sex is about power

[Anonymous No.12463031]

>>12463014
>Book of Genesis
>20th century
"Be fruitful and multiply" was not written in 20xx. Does anyone on this board read what they talk about?

[Anonymous No.12463035]

>>12462778
Always love seeing the mountain from which Christians preach their enlightened and infallible viewpoints to us humble, ignorant mortals. How do I become wise like you anon? Do I just have to memorize every word of the Bible? Abandon any personal motions of reasoning, and "simply believe" in whatever Christian theology teaches? Go to Church™ every Sunday like a good person, even amid the monstrous modern scandals many of them presently rest on? Please teach me anon, I want to use booming diction like you do, and for everyone around me to know that because I have read and absorbed the teachings of one book from one culture of the world, I am thereby wiser than everyone else I speak to, who must simply listen to the commandments I give them.

[Anonymous No.12463041]

>>12463021
I'm arguing that Paul says abstinence > marriage.
You are arguing that they are equal and that only sex outside marriage is bad.

[Anonymous No.12463042]

>>12462943
>>12463021
Thomas and Aristotle's cosmological arguments are good and all, but for me it's Plotinus and Proclus. Neoplatonic argument is really underrated

[Anonymous No.12463044]

>>12462977
If discussing philosophy is your criterion for possessing "reason" then most people don't have it.

[Anonymous No.12463072]

>>12463042
Do they give evidence of any specific religion or just arguments for the existence of a deity?

[Anonymous No.12463085]

>>12463072
the proofs are for One God

[Anonymous No.12463086]

>>12463035
Your resentment is not my ill, but yours. I'm just a random asshole on the internet. Research that which you seem to hate. You will be surprised by the nuance and beauty of its arguments.

>>12463044
Agreed.

>>12463042
Patrish.

>>12463041
Well that's Paul's opinion. He is allowed that, but if abstinence is better than marriage who will make new Christians? He's a dummy tbhwy.

[Anonymous No.12463093]

>>12463042
oh and Feser does go over Plotinus. Plotinus in fact had a great deal to say about beauty, and much of it was taken and used by the Church to this day. Augustine plagiarized the man.

[Anonymous No.12463095]

>>12463085
Okay, so the choice of which religion would be a personal matter afterwards?

[Anonymous No.12463099]

>>12462593
>>12462778

But reproduction is the bad side of immortality. Something to do with woman's weakness and her utter ignorance of Dialectic. If man is per Heaven's immortality, infinitely secure such that he might even unconditionally partake in death to no harm, woman is per Earth's immortality, infinitely insecure such that she must partake in omni-conditional demonstration of fearing death to maximum harm. Looking past the cruel irony of reproduction in regard to woman having no Ontogenic power past passively bearing a man or merely replicating herself to no further power, there is also the insidious Teleology of reproduction itself, and its regard to man. Man is Jesus, Parmenides, Plato, Plotinus, Hegel, etc. and even his parsimony of demonstration against death is rather...boisterous. He is always here. His light is always on. He is only being "reproduced" for woman's sake. Recapitulated for her entertainment alone.

[Anonymous No.12463125]

>>12463099
>Something to do with
You're going to have to build a better argument than that.

And your argument is absurd. Reproduction is the realization and fulfillment of mankind. It is why normies live and breathe and get up to go to jobs they hate. When they fail to understand this, whether by capitalism's indoctrination or by a broken family background, average brainlet men and women become monstrous. They hoard Star Trek figurines and keep a herd of cats and post on 4chan. Incels and the women who made them are entirely, entirely a first world problem. And it is rooted in capital's destruction of the family.

[Anonymous No.12463202]

>>12463086
>but if abstinence is better than marriage who will make new Christians?

But I am aware of some that murmur: What, say they, if all men should abstain from all sexual intercourse, whence will the human race exist? Would that all would this, only in charity out of a pure heart, and good conscience, and faith unfeigned; much more speedily would the City of God be filled, and the end of the world hastened.

[Anonymous No.12463248]

>>12462615
Schopenhauer was anti-sex

[Anonymous No.12463266]

>>12463202
Fair enough. I doubt that will ever happen, but fair enough. It might, who knows. Especially with the horrifying technology coming in the next couple of centuries.

[Anonymous No.12463267]

I don't believe in God.

I see the the fundamental disconnect between sexual activity and intellectual pursuits.
You're throwing away the only recent adaptation humans have the moment you engage in sexual activity, even the moment arousal occurs!, and undermine reason's control of the passions making you a slave and but a passenger in this ride in life with little agency over it. This is why most people are mediocre and losers and abandon their dreams, and are pathetic slaves to multitude of competing whims and urges. I am infinitely less productive when sexually active, plagued by constant horniness even at 3 sexual releases a day, and never endeavor to read in so much as a single page without forcing myself to with discipline—a worthless sack of shit like every other human out there. Abstinence confers remarkable productivity, and if practiced mentally, and one deliberately avoids sexual stimuli, they will paradoxically find themselves less aroused, less horny, and have a clean mind to work with. It is like being on a CNS stimulant, and the mind is elevated to better pursuits, where there is a constant well of motivation to not only do a task but to enjoy doing it.

All the brainlets in this thread defending sexual activity presuppose religious motivations but are the ones that sound religious themselves, thinking the sexual organs and activity from their use are infallible and a biological free lunch, an absurd premise. They are willfully ignorant because if they would explore the underpinnings of the human body, they would realize that they with every single indulgence, they've reinforced among the most primal regions of their brain, worse, a region able to induce hypfrontality to hijack control of your very self to ensure that what your evolutionary programming thinks is procreation; ruined their more recent faculties by directing them toward, and polluting them with, endless sexual experiences; destroyed their motivation and capacity for other tasks making them prone to incessant sexual distractions— all to no end, it's never satisfied more than a half hour, and only grows stronger with every single instance. Nothing is accomplished. Nothing is created. You think you're the one fucking or pretending to anyways when masturbating, but what's truly being fucked here is the most powerful instrument in the known universe, the human brain, your very mind (!), reduced to nothing more than that of a a stupid ape exploiting some primal programming to extract pleasure out of it, which once reinforced, directs you rather than you it. You throw away the only unique developments that separate us from the animals and tragically ruin them by reducing these faculties as means to sexual ends. Instead of trying to get to the next level, to be more than human, you decide to waste your one life by emulating animals.

[Anonymous No.12463270]

>>12462778

[Anonymous No.12463272]

Sexual arousal induces hypofrontality, impairing working memory and executive performance:
>Pornographic picture processing interferes with working memory performance.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23167900

>Sexual Arousal Decreases the Functional Synchronization Between Cortical Areas in Young Men
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0092623X.2012.665815?journalCode=usmt20

>The Impact of Sexual Arousal on Sexual Risk-Taking and Decision-Making in Men and Women.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26310879

Adverse effects of sexual excess on the brain:

>Brain structure and functional connectivity associated with pornography consumption: the brain on porn.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24871202
Shows a loss of gray matter in the right caudate of the striatum from pornography indulgence.


Literally stronger than drug urges:
>Craving Responses to Methamphetamine and Sexual Visual Cues in Individuals With Methamphetamine Use Disorder After Long-Term Drug Rehabilitation.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29725310/
"that sexual demand might be more robust than drug demand"

[Anonymous No.12463284]

>>12463270

[Anonymous No.12463292]

>>12463267
>>12463272
great material
thanks

[Anonymous No.12463305]

>>12462593
Science Discovers the Physiological Value of Continence

[Anonymous No.12463310]

>>12462615
Science discovers the physiological value of continence. >>12463305

[Anonymous No.12463344]

>>12463086
I don't hate the Bible, nor Christianity. But people often become blind followers to these ideologies, which is only encouraged and glorified by the institutions in question, and this is certainly not a virtue. Individuals becoming close-minded in their
worldview, while simultaneously thinking themselves to now see a greater expanse than they did before. Or believing they have grown in their love towards others, while actually having only adopted a new, selective-empathy, primarily towards Christians and more-specifically to those of their own sect, and reduced their compassion towards outgroups (non-Christians, LGBT's, etc) that they previously felt less distinction from. What would happen to homosexuals, for example, under your ideal vision of society?

[Anonymous No.12463345]

>>12463267
>I'm literally too retarded to maintain moderation and self-control
>reee all humans are just like that and whoever disagrees is a brainlet
Beyond sad.

[Anonymous No.12463356]

>>12463344
>What would happen to homosexuals, for example, under your ideal vision of society?
They get converted back to regular

[Anonymous No.12463358]

>>12463095
Of course not, dude. All arguments for God must always lead back to the Christian God™ alone, and no other conceptions of God are allowed.

[Anonymous No.12463369]

>>12462593
Also, Plain Facts for Old and Young. Not very useful for backing up any arguments in this day and age but I found it helpful for aiding my resolve. People forget that Kellogg was one of the most brilliant physicians of his day.

[Anonymous No.12463396]

This nofap superpowers autism rebranded under the guise of embarrassing tradcath larpery and supposed virtue-seeking by post-rationalizing incels is the worst thing to happen to /lit/ since JBP. Stay in your fucking containment boards.

[Anonymous No.12463399]

>>12463344
>What would happen to homosexuals, for example, under your ideal vision of society?
Nothing. The Church would treat them the same: they are God's children and deserving of mercy. But the sacrament of marriage is not for them. It's not their fault they can't procreate. They can be married by the state if they want, but marriage is very literally a heterosexual concept, and raising children in love its end. I expect an argument will be made on these terms, crediting adoption or surrogate mothers as adequate substitutes for both partners sharing parenthood.

[Anonymous No.12463426]

>>12463345
I'm not him. But considering the state of modern society, less than 100 years after the Sexual Revolution, he does have a point.

[Anonymous No.12463436]

>>12463396
Super high quality post, mate.

[Anonymous No.12463446]

>>12463436
Like thread, like reply.

[Anonymous No.12463455]

>>12463272

Ejaculation is sentient.

[Anonymous No.12463475]

>>12463446
Not really. The thread has a much better level of discussion than the shit you posted.

[Anonymous No.12463477]

>>12463345
Nowhere does it say what you claim. You just dislike the message because it implies you're a dick for a brain and setup a straw man as a retort. Your assumptions are false and dishonest.
Moderation indeed was the norm for me, forced by school and work. When sexually active, once per day was usually what I restrained it to (ad libitum is actually greater than 3 times daily), and I have tried periods where I moderated it to once a week. It still exerted adverse effects, baseline horniness was very high and easily triggered, and even when "in moderation and self control", is still being weighed in the background of your mind against other whims and potentialities. Its indulgence, especially with multiple women or simulations thereof, naturally incurs a renewed interest, i.e. the Coolidge Effect, and sexual activity induces ΔFosB, leading to habituation, and in this day and age with an endless array of artificial and in-person stimuli, is only going to escalate as one ages in force and intensity. Most people just swap their masturbation habit for a sex habit.
Nowhere did I say I couldn't function. Yes. I could get by in life just fine. I just was mediocre, prone to distraction and relied entirely on discipline, which left me unhappy, everything in a day being hassle, and my only real thought was going back and "getting laid". Abstinence is what grants childlike motivation and curiosity about intellectual matters back again. It is the only way of sustainably inducing daily flow states with unbridled productivity.

[Anonymous No.12463525]

>>12463475
>christlarper proselytizing
>same 2,5 autists spamming the same half-dozen cherrypicked studies and telling their coolstories of becoming übermenschen when abstaining like every over thread on this topic in the past few months
>good discussion
Maybe if you just came from reddit it is.

[Anonymous No.12463551]

>>12463525
They actually have arguments for their positions, unlike you.

[Anonymous No.12463553]

>>12463525
If you hate this thread so much why are you posting in it. Give a coherent argument or fuck off pseud.

[Anonymous No.12463558]

>>12463477
>it is the only way for me and libidinal hypertactivity to not be a raging mediocrity, hence it's the same for everyone else
Well, you probably should brush up on first order logic before continuing your incredibly productive intellectual pursuits of promoting abstention on a hentai forum.

[Anonymous No.12463567]

>>12463551
>i stopped having sex and now my "productivity" is twice as high!!1
>argument
Are you literally from reddit? Consider going back.

[Anonymous No.12463605]

>>12463567
Engage their arguments instead of believing you can win the discussion by labeling others incels. This is not woke twitter, this is /lit/.

[Anonymous No.12463617]

>>12463605
>unsubstantiated conjectures and non-sequiturs
>arguments
Incidentally it's also not /pol/, sweaty.

[Anonymous No.12463627]

>>12463617
Pseud confirmed. Just stop. Atheists are already well known for their stubborn ignorance, but you are only embarrassing yourself now. I don't care if you do that, but I care that you will feel bad about it later.

[Anonymous No.12463643]

>>12462593
This was a core belief of the Cathars, unfortunately I can't remember the name of the book I read about them--it was a sociological history of a small village in the south of France.

[Anonymous No.12463647]

>>12463617
They have arguments, they even have studies for their positions. You have the "great" argument of calling others "incels".
I will take /pol/ over woke twitter.

[Anonymous No.12463696]

>>12463627
>ure a pseud
>just stop
>atheists (???)
Very powerful. Don't pop that vein from anger, incelio.
>>12463647
Yeah, I know you're generally content with seeing sciency looking words and taking on faith that they support whatever it is your being told, but I'm afraid none of them even remotely support the wide-ranging autism about long-term abstinence.
>I will take /pol/ over
I know. And you should.

[Anonymous No.12463701]

>>12462593
Let me guess, anglo?

[Anonymous No.12463704]

>>12463696
i dont even agree with the abstinence autists but you are doing a horrible job of defending your position

[Anonymous No.12463709]

>>12462593
Let me guess, *nglo?

[Anonymous No.12463714]

>>12463696
Again, you are not making any argument. Calling someone else an "incel" may work on twitter, but this is not twitter.

[Anonymous No.12463715]

>>12463709

[Anonymous No.12463740]

>>12463714
I've made the same argument multiple times, you shit for brains. There's nothing but empty conjecture ITT and what studies have been linked are as usual in no way supportive of the delusional views, but just vaguely related to the overall topic, which is of course just enough to convince sub 80 iq morons like you, who don't even bother to read the abstracts. I'll provide another counter-argument when you've fulfilled your burden of proof instead of just repeating "not an argument" like a spastic retard that you are.

[Anonymous No.12463751]

>>12463740
You didn't prove anything you claimed.

[Anonymous No.12463755]

>>12463751
Are you mentally challenged? Do you not understand what burden of proof is? Unironically consider suicide.

[Anonymous No.12463763]

>>12463755
Saying someone's argument is "an empty conjuncture" is not an "auto-win button". You have to use arguments to show why his arguments are false, instead of just saying "your argument is wrong dawg".
This is not much better than your previous attempt of winning the discussion by calling others "losers".

[Anonymous No.12463764]

>>12463358
So what's the proof for the Christian God? AFAIK Christianity has its roots from Roman tradition and Judaism. It's practically a Roman religion but with characters altered to fit the mode of the Talmud.

[Anonymous No.12463776]

>>12463763
>you have to use arguments to prove my completely unsubstantiated ex nihilo statements wrong
This is your fucking brain on /pol/. State one of the "arguments" I should be disproving this way.

[Anonymous No.12463782]

>>12463764
>So what's the proof for the Christian God?
The anon you're replying to I'm pretty sure is posting sarcastically.

If you need proof, look to Scripture, Aristotle, Aquinas, and Plotinus. The sparknotes version is Feser's book on five proofs. In short: there is no indisputable physical evidence. There are plenty of holy artifacts: the shroud of turin, the images of the virgin of guadalupe or mary of las lajas, or the testimony of the apostles. But really you will only find proof by investigation. You won't be convinced by a briefing.

[Anonymous No.12463785]

>>12463776
Answer this guy

>>12463267
>>12463477

[Anonymous No.12463792]

>>12463782
Does it explain why religion is needed for morality instead of just a fact based ethical system?

[Anonymous No.12463803]

>>12463785
I did - there's a link on his last post. And he is the prime example for empty conjecture literally stating that whatever self-diagnosis and fantasy superpowers he ascribed to himself must be true for everyone else because reasons.

[Anonymous No.12463810]

>>12463803
You didn't. You are just a lazy fucker who thinks you can "win" the debate without actually making any argument but just saying "you are a loser" or "you are wrong".

[Anonymous No.12463812]

>>12463764
This is such a huge ask. You have to put yourself in the place of a first century Jew to understand the radical nature of Jesus claiming to be the messiah to understand how fucking insane it is. The New Testament didn't exist until a century or two later. Jesus was a carpenter (the allusion to God as tradesman, like a potter who makes vessels, is inescapable), but he was also extremely well versed in Hebrew scripture. He was the Logos incarnate. God, begotten here on Earth. When he said he would destroy the Temple and raise it up again in three days he was crucified for heresy. But he did it. The Temple he rebuilt was himself. Witnesses of the resurrection of Jesus flew out from Jerusalem and spread his message. The evidence imo is incontrovertible. God was born, raised, lived and died here. He came to experience life as the doomed creatures he made, and provided a way for us to find his peace.

[Anonymous No.12463821]

>>12463810
>"you are wrong" verbatim
Is this some kind of retardation trolling?

[Anonymous No.12463824]

>>12463792
>fact based ethical system
kek

>morality
An objective morality has been revealed by Jesus Christ. If you want to know more, read his gospel. The sermon on the mount and the sermon on the plain, at least.

Ethics are only man's norms. Ethics change with the time. The law of God does not, it is an objective morality.

[Anonymous No.12463831]

>>12463824
You should be stoned for being retarded.
Ephesians 5:4

[Anonymous No.12463836]

>>12462593
I like the Stoic position on this.
The desire for anything that is not virtue (which happens to be in your control) is negative for yourself, since it leads to anxiety, distress, etc.
By acting promiscuously, you become more promiscuous and your desire for sex increases.
At the same time, sex is necessary for procreation. So, you won't have sex for the sake of pleasure, since it would be trading virtue for short term pleasure. But you will have sex for the sake of procreation.

[Anonymous No.12463845]

>>12463831
>contentless post with no argument only an out of context quote that is a non sequitur that contradicts his own post
wow i'm btfo

[Anonymous No.12463854]

>>12462593
time to start reading big Pete and the second wave feminists.

[Anonymous No.12463855]

>>12463845
You're a redditspacing christlarper in 2019. Being btfo is your natural state.

[Anonymous No.12463862]

>>12463855
(You)

[Anonymous No.12463867]

Sex is only for procreation. Feels best that way too.

[Anonymous No.12463872]

>>12463558
Even the most "successful" people in society, I regard as mediocre and slaves to various whims. They lack true autonomy over self and locked in heteronomy, in bondage at all times to lower instincts and more instantaneous gratifications, which while it may be postponed, it is never overcame and always surrendered to. In fact, their very motivations behind their aspirations are merely vicarious expressions of and ulterior motives for sexual desires, thinking that doing this, or that will help them get laid. I was surrounded by them in medical school.
>>12463567
You assume sexual activity has no biological cost, which is ludicrous; the premise that it may affect productivity, considering the substantial physiological happenings in the background, is a perfectly reasonable hypothesis. I've already demonstrated how even a state of arousal is undesirable, and has a built in mechanism of suppressing prefrontal neurotransmission to ensure that what is thought to be procreation is executed rather than debated and philosophized by the organism, which makes evolutionary sense as without it indeed may have well spelled our extinction long ago. I further introduced that it is subject to habituation. You need to be a retard to think that—something so immensely pleasurable that even the stimuli is its own reward, so capable of directing men making men driven to near madness as Plato said, something that increases heart rate and dispels almost all other concerns while engaged in and culminates in orgasm, a sudden high that (I find for that brief few seconds, acutely better than even opioids), followed by an expulsion of a substance if examined is able to propagate life itself and is extremely rich in its composition— doesn't affect a man. And this is reasoned as simply as possible, to show that anyone not willfully ignorant could consider the premise that sexual activity may affect productivity. To say "wtf, it doesn't make sense that abstaining could increase productivity", shows just an absolute denialism and a refusal to even entertain the hypothesis in question probably because it scares you that fun time has a cost. I've addressed this time and again, in the past, much more earnestly, and in actual detail, this post is to illustrate your complete refusal to consider, just for an instance, that sexual activity may be detrimental and expose that arguing with you is like arguing with a sophist. I will go precise detail in my next post, delineating precisely what is occurring within the body and the mechanisms that would explain how sexual abstinence provides favorable conditions that would explain increases in motivation and productivity.

[Anonymous No.12463895]

>>12463872
I'm not the one you are arguing with.
>Even the most "successful" people in society, I regard as mediocre and slaves to various whims. They lack true autonomy over self and locked in heteronomy, in bondage at all times to lower instincts and more instantaneous gratifications, which while it may be postponed, it is never overcame and always surrendered to.
I agree that the way we define "successful" people is wrong.

>In fact, their very motivations behind their aspirations are merely vicarious expressions of and ulterior motives for sexual desires, thinking that doing this, or that will help them get laid. I was surrounded by them in medical school.
But I disagree in this part. I don't think everyone has as their final motivation sexual desire.

[Anonymous No.12463922]

you brainlets are disregarding that hormones are literally making the decisions in younger people (who incidentally are almost entirely ignorant of philosophy)

[Anonymous No.12463933]

>>12463922
That's why OP said the urges have to be suppressed

[Anonymous No.12463982]

>>12463872
I'm preparing dinner for a unplanned visit of some friends later, so I'm copying and pasting a former post instead of completing my fresh one now:
---------------------------------
Sexual activity affects the body in more ways than practically any other action. The sex act (masturbation included), from arousal to ejaculation to habituation has chilling physiological repercussions. Endocrinology and neuroscience show that shy of drugs, no other action affects the body so much, so suddenly--- hormones, neurotransmitters, are all profoundly affected. Upon arousal, dopamine is released, not only in the capacity of motivating you, as would be the impetus for wanting to grab that needle of heroin, but you are biologically rewarded just for the mere image of arousal!
Then sexual stimulation occurs, and opioid facilitated reward begins, as even more dopamine is released.
Finally, it culminates in orgasm. The final reward is there. Endogenous opioid peptides suddenly flood the brain, the love hormone oxytocin for bonding is released which also signals the conversion of T to DHT, 5-HT increases, and the anti-dopamine hormone prolactin rises sharply, gonadotropin inhibitory hormone is released, and that is just scratching the surface.
Prolactin has antagonistic effects on dopamine transmission which leaves you feeling lazy and spent, and while the refractory period lasts a mere 5 or 10 minutes, the elevated prolactin continues to exert adverse effects elsewhere in the brain, for upwards of 16+ hours.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4896089/#S6title
---------------------------------------

I will expand in detail should this thread be up tomorrow evening. The prolactinogenic consequences alone can explain post-orgasmic motivational apathy, but I want to add, that even if remedied with a dopamine agonist like pramipexole will fail to fully correct this state, so prolactin itself is not sole culprit. Indeed, I tried ways to make this fountain of fun work, tried bandaging it with many pharmacological compounds, selegiline in doses selective to MAOb + post orgasmic vitamin B-6 worked best but still paled in comparison to flow state and pure motivation, and general peacefulness and bliss, brought about by actual abstinence. The secret to unlocking the next level of the human mind is pure and unfettered celibacy and it should be broken only

>>12463922
Hormonal reductionist. This is an obsolete explanation for sexual frequency, especially considering we now see delta-FosB induction from sexual experience, illustrating it is subject to behavioral cues and from this reinforcement. The only hormone showing any statistical relationship with sexual frequency is DHT. Most men raised with pornography accessible at a finger tip, in an era where it's socially acceptable; nay, even viewed as a necessity like evacuating urine; can attest that their sexual urges and frequency have only increased with age.

[Anonymous No.12463992]

>>12463035
The older I get the more unoriginal atheists seem to become.

[Anonymous No.12464027]

>>12463982
I've seen this post before.
>someone in the world keeps pictures of von gruber as reaction images

You're a medical doctor aren't you.

[Anonymous No.12464060]

>>12463872
The absolute state of this pseudointellectual word salad.
>You assume sexual activity has no biological cost
First of all there was no such assumption made, this is your own strawman to attack. Secondly to say "physical activity may affect productivity" is to say nothing of value. Just water here.
>I've already demonstrated
>I further introduced
Comedy gold. The facts that biological stimuli like arousal or hunger or pain momentarily cloud our judgment and that we crave pleasurable things are known to preteens. They weren't and aren't disputed. They also don't even tangentially support, let alone directly speak in favor of total abstention. If anything they're arguments against it as total abstention both in short and long term increases sensitivity to stimuli thereby causing more frequent, persistent and powerful states of arousal as compared to those practicing moderate sexual activity. Once again you're trying to puff your cheeks with something supposedly relevant and vaguely in the same topical place as the main question, obfuscate it with walls of unrelated garbage and hope this will somehow pass as substantive argumentation and make everyone miss the lack of actual logical links between these and your position. Doubly funny that you keep going on about productivity when you've spent the last half year religiously shilling your neo-nofap cult on an anime forum. Imagine how much easier would it be to get laid and do something with actual utility or at least less idiotic.

[Anonymous No.12464116]

>>12464060
I'm not him, but given your post, you agree that sexual desire clouds your judgement. Would you agree that this is a negative effect?

[Anonymous No.12464211]

>>12463396
You can't degrade ideas by trying to attach immature names to them anon. "Superpowers", "autism", "tradcath", "incels". Why try to hide the ideas behind these childish terms, anon?

[Anonymous No.12464239]

>>12463992
Not even close to an athiest.

[Anonymous No.12464243]

>>12463696
You feel that seething anger possessing you in this reply? You feel how your very humanity slips away as you type? Wouldn't it be nice to rise above such base whims, to a place where no earthly being can degrade you into a frothing rage? Anger is much like being horny in that regard, consider that.

[Anonymous No.12464394]

>>12462706
Your a Margaret Meade brainwashed retard. Read War before civilization or Napoleon Chagnon. Societies without regulated access to sex and women are in a constant state of competition and violence. They often have a perpetual rate of violent death that exceeds the second world war in proportion to their population. There is also less sexual perversion in these regulated societies, though that might contradict the false narrative you've been programmed to believe.

[Anonymous No.12464403]

>enter this thread
>ctrl+f wein
>Phrase not found
why

[Anonymous No.12464415]

>>12462593
Late Tolstoy is what you are looking for if you want your beliefs confirmed OP.

[Anonymous No.12464419]

>>12464116
If you're looking to minimize any base impacts on your mind, then certainly. The thing is, abstinence won't rid you of these desires. Your libido will spike short term, then fall down somewhat and maintain a high level. It's singularly a myth that you're going to magically unman yourself by merely abstaining and become immune or barely sensitive to arousal. Quite the opposite. Hence all the Freudian talk about sublimation aka channeling the raw frustration from unresolved sexual desire into creative endeavors. Which isn't some kind of magical ability you gain at lvl 80, but rather a built-in coping mechanism and one that is quite psychologically taxing. In essence the problem of achieving maximum average "clarity" of mind comes down to a task of mathematical optimization of your sexual activity to such a state where on one hand it wouldn't cause compounding build-up of addiction and on the other - the accumulation of frustration. The "eat just for sustenance", but in libidinal terms. It's not that easy to balance it, but it is the way to go if your aiming for the global maximum of "lucidity". What concerns abstention - it's chiefly a cop out. In the words of St. Augustine: complete abstinence is easier than perfect moderation. It's rabid shilling for non-religious reasons by a couple fellows here is mostly just spillage from some nofap-wizardry club. However one good advice from the pile of prefab cultist promotional material of our delta-fos-b friend is abstaining from porn, which truly is cancer and wrecks any efforts to normalize your sex life invariably.

[Anonymous No.12464489]

>>12464394
Big fan of Steve Pinker huh? It's easy to misrepresent "violence" in primitive societies where trouble makers were more likely to just be put down then locked up and you have various forms of rationalized infanticide/cannibalism/etc to maintain an egalitarian social structures all of which might be disturbing to modern humane liberals but served a function.
I'm not a fan of Meade but if you want a more nuanced overview see "The Trashing of Margaret Mead"

[Anonymous No.12464565]

>>12464419
>If you're looking to minimize any base impacts on your mind, then certainly.
The discussion on what is the best strategy to reduce sexual desire is another one, but it seems you agree that sexual desire contains a negative side, like OP and that reducing it seems to be good for "peace of mind".
This is very "counter cultural" nowadays, since sexual pleasure is taught to be the greatest good and sexual desire is seem as something good that should even be cultivated.

[Anonymous No.12464571]

>>12464489
m8 that isn't 'misrepresenting' that is violence no matter how you look at it. You're just saying the violence may have served a purpose

also primitive societies were not egalitarian

[Anonymous No.12464612]

>>12464565
No, I don't agree that sexual desire is bad in and of itself. That's why I specifically pointed out the value system where it would be bad. I also don't agree that "sexual pleasure is taught to be the greatest good and sexual desire is seem as something good that should even be cultivated" and find it to be an overestimation borne out of personal frustration, though I may of course be wrong.

[Anonymous No.12464638]

>>12464571
Any idiot can recognize there exists different forms of violence e.g. premeditated psychopathic murder vs. heat of the moment acts. Organized mass violence is a phenomena that requires states. The evidence for pre-state "warfare" is very light and debatable. And yes in all regards primitive society was egalitarian compared to any modern society (realistically you can only relatively compare in this fashion, ideal types don't exist). Yes when disputes and issues arose they in some cases may have been dealt with in a manner that might be considered inhumane by modern liberal standards but the way the modern state imprisons and "reeducates" people is equally questionable.

[Anonymous No.12464658]

>>12464638
Im not saying modern life is better in any way, just that violence was more common back then. you were a lot more likely to get killed especially if you were male. if any way of life is better it's probably the one we were living in for tens of thousands of years and were more adapted to

I still take issue with the idea it was egalitarian though, the powerful men basically made everyone obey them.

[Anonymous No.12464670]

>>12464612
>No, I don't agree that sexual desire is bad in and of itself.
When sexual desire leads clouds your mind and leads you to do bad things it is bad, wouldn't you agree?
When you can't have peace of mind because you are anxious to have it, it is also bad.
When you can't satisfy it and you feel frustrated, it is also bad.
When it leads you to believe that sexual pleasure is a good and you will find fulfilment in it, it is also bad.
When would sexual desire lead you to do well? When you should procreate and it leads you to do it.

>I also don't agree that "sexual pleasure is taught to be the greatest good and sexual desire is seem as something good that should even be cultivated"
Read Cosmo or Men's Health. Or watch sitcoms. Or any relationship advice column/talk show.

[Anonymous No.12464691]

>>12464658
That entire premise is based on a small questionable amount of data. The academic conscientious not long ago was the opposite and before that it was the opposite again, it swings back and forth. Guys like Keeley and Chagnon are just a reaction against guys like Marshall Sahlins.

[Anonymous No.12464779]

I'm >>12464670
I'm leaving now.
One can argue "but what if sexual desire leads to you doing better, such as eating healthy, going to the gym, etc"?
I would say that those things are not inherently good when done for the wrong reasons. The same with "working harder so you make more money and can be more attractive".

[Anonymous No.12464828]

>>12464670
Desire is not some discrete binary affliction that constantly renders you either completely mad with lust or completely pained by frustration. It's very much a continuous scale and yes, it does need to be carefully managed, but so does a number of other aspects of our biology and so do many social aspects of our lives. And none of them are "evil" for it.
>Read Cosmo or Men's Health. Or watch sitcoms.
I don't magazines primarily selling sex or lowest common denominator TV is quite representative of society as a whole.

[Anonymous No.12464904]

Stop arguing with this faggot. Nofap works. Its not that hard to fucking understand.

[Anonymous No.12464992]

>>12462593
As for suppressed I think Think And Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill. And the books on gnosticteachings.org, didn't understand much of the audio lectures on there and haven't read the books but it's all about "transmuting sexual energy" by not fornicating or masturbating and "sex magic" or whatever.

[Anonymous No.12465028]

>>12464992
Oh, and I forgot Libido Dominandi by E Michael Jones. I think he's written other books or texts on the subject too maybe. I think The Ratcatcher was about it, I read it but don't think I finished it.

[Anonymous No.12465048]

>>12463396
lame post
>>12463270
zizipost
>>12463042
basedpost

[Anonymous No.12465144]

>>12462593
>catholic veil
huh?

[Anonymous No.12465152]

>>12462706
nice pseudoscience bro

[Anonymous No.12465154]

>>12462778
Based

[Anonymous No.12465175]

>>12462812
>>12462943
r u me?

[Anonymous No.12465266]

>>12462593
Atomised by Houellebecq is a novel that is more or less built on the ideas in your post and elaborates on them further

[Anonymous No.12465367]

>>12463014
Genesis God's first command was go forth and multiply.

By Noah's time in the narrative, marriage was already an institution.

Can you support your claim please?

[Anonymous No.12465385]

>>12463764
if you actually think this you need to reevaluate what you know about the "roman religion"

[Anonymous No.12465392]

>>12464904
>reee im a superman i said!

[Anonymous No.12465394]

>>12463086
>>12465048
based and breadpilled

[Anonymous No.12466392]

Bump

[Anonymous No.12466751]

>>12463982
>The secret to unlocking the next level of the human mind

You've been copypasting the same handful of shitty excerpts for months.

[Anonymous No.12466958]

>>12462593
Kierkegaard

[Anonymous No.12467121]

>>12462593
Schopenhauer

[Anonymous No.12467313]

>>12462593
Go fuck yourself with your thinly veiled blogpost

[Anonymous No.12467818]

>>12463345
Multi quidem facilius se abstinent ut non utantur, quam temperent ut bene utantur.

[Anonymous No.12467831]

>>12462778
This

[Anonymous No.12467874]

>>12462593
I think sexual intimacy with someone you truly care for and would sacrifice your life for is the greatest act a human can make, and sexual intimacy in order to satisfy a momentary feeling of lust with someone no more important to you than a fleshlight is the greatest sin a human can commit. Now, I I don't believe in god or gods, but I do believe that love for oneself and ones companion are more important than the life and death of billions of people. so far from being a tough decision, I would not think twice about sacrificing all of humanity for the sake of someone I truly loved.

[Anonymous No.12467897]

>>12463035
Imagine being this full of ressentiment

[Anonymous No.12468352]

>>12463099

I DEMAND someone to engage.

[Anonymous No.12469716]

>>12467897
Most atheists are, and their hatred isn't ideological like a Marxist Leninist for instance but it's literally personal because the precepts get in the way of their debouchery. WTF? THEYRE NO FUN! WAAAAAA! I WANT TO WATCH RICH AND MORTY, EAT CEREAL ALL DAY AND MASTURBATE! T-THRES NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS. HOW DARE THEY TELL PEOPLE WHAT TO DO!
I don't even believe in it but I love provoking these people in real life. Watch how flustered they get. Watch how hot headed they become. It's personal to them.

[Anonymous No.12470901]

bump

[Anonymous No.12470992]

>>12467874
I agree 100% with your post, down to the disbelief in deities part. Now the question is how to find such a woman you can get intimate with who isn't religious?

[Anonymous No.12471042]

>>12465392
Why does this hurt you so?

[Anonymous No.12471277]

>>12471042
Hierarchy is derived form hierarkhia which means rule of a high priest in ancient Greek. It implies he is on a lower level than abstinent individual, which is true. Someone able to master himself will be master of others too.