Philosophy of sex

...

Kill yourself

>freedom means being ruled by your passions
>self-discipline is oppression

Kant was a great example of IYI (Intellectual Yet Idiot)

it isn't self discipline if you're doing it because your concept of a higher entity forbids you

yeah that's what christian leadership has always said right, 'have self discipline, its your choice to be free'

>those fucking crowd shots showing their reactions

kek do they even understand what he's saying?

it is because you want to please the higher entity and understand that his rules are good for you.

hahahah fuck off, it's because you don't want to go to hell. that's your concept of 'understanding that his rules are good for you'

> it's because you don't want to go to hell. that's your concept of 'understanding that his rules are good for you'
you have it backwards.

we don't live virtuously in order to be saved, we live virtuously because we are being saved. Salvation is by faith and good deeds are an expression of faith. If you love God you want to keep his commandments. The bible says we are made in his image so we should live with dignity and follow his example.

But some may have your understanding, the novices, yet even they are engaging in self-discipline, just like someone decides not to smoke because he wants to avoid getting cancer.

keep fooling yourself if you want but it's the age old question. Do people follow the law because they don't want to get caught or do they follow the law because they're good people?

>do people sometimes do good stuff?

the question is too vague, different people operate on different levels; rather you should question your own motivations and goals.

no you're just denying the obvious. it is precisely because it is a law in the first place that people do not commit crimes, the act would be commonplace if it were not forbidden by a perceived higher order with attached consequences. this is analogous to the concept of sin wherein it is avoided out of perceived consequences enacted by a higher order or it is avoided in order to maintain the status quo and is often masked by the concept of self virtue

>the most interesting philosophical views on sexuality in your opinion?
>Also share interesting anecdotes

lmao

this is like asking a beggar what he thinks about foie gras

further, this mask is employed as a defence mechanism to cover up the underlying egoism of the self

anecdotes about philosphers.

...

are you saying that the only reason people don't rape or torture each other is because they're illegal? Not because they might actually have a personal aversion and moral repulsion to those practices?

what exactly do you think it was like before we had laws?

>how much nonsense can i fit into one post
>oh, not nearly enough

This desu

if you had a point you would make it

If you wanted to keep God's commandments you'd be following all of them, the entirety of the old Testament laws, to the letter. If you wanted to be a Christian you would love neighbour as you love thyself, and love your neighbours as the disciples loved jesus. Promiscuity is not denounced by jesus, nor is premarital sex, and as long as you're keeping yourself clean and healthy, there's no reason to think the Christian, by which I assume you mean puritanical, view on sex is useful

>interesting
>dude never have sex unless you marry early and then have a shit marriage since you were guided by your loins, or marry late and waste the best parts of your life not enjoying yourself and learning about your body

>true
How is it true?

>good for your soul
It's easy to be good for something that doesn't exist

>implying the purpose of life is to enjoy yourself

I didn't say that, but the enjoyment of you get from sex will enhance other parts of your life, thanks to the exercise, stress release, bonding and self-improvement in general. It's a good thing and to not do it is a terrible idea

Nice non-response though

>it is precisely because it is a law in the first place that people do not commit crimes, the act would be commonplace if it were not forbidden by a perceived higher order with attached consequences

You say crimes would be "commonplace" without the law, which suggests you believe crimes can exist without a legal system. Fine.

But what crimes exactly would be commonplace, and who would be guilty of them? Everyone? A minority of people? A majority?

>managing the wild and dangerous human sexuality by channelling it through pure love and devotion to another is bad.

>Promiscuity is not denounced by jesus, nor is premarital sex

Jesus is even stricter when he says that if you look upon a woman with lust you commit adultery.
He also restates the command from the beginning about a man leaving his father and mother and clinging to his wife to become one flesh. He also makes divorce harder.

Also Christianity doesn't just function of Jesus' quotes alone, not sure why you even tried this angle since you are a disbeliever. Paul and the apostles and the Old Testament speaks of the dangers of promiscuity, fornication and adultery...

>If you wanted to keep God's commandments you'd be following all of them, the entirety of the old Testament laws

We are to keep the timeless moral law, which is summed up by the golden rule, the 10 commandments, etc.
The ceremonial/sacrificial/dietary laws have been fulfilled, Jesus was their fulfillment. They were all preludes to the real sacrifice anyway.

>if you aren't a promiscuous degenerate you will either marry too early or too late!!! go have sex asap!!

nice false dichotomy, who taught you this stuff, MTV?

>soul doesn't exist

if you believe this then you're not really conscious but still asleep.

And adultery is only against the law based on the tenets of the OT.
And the making divorce harder and describing marriage as making one flesh from two is fine, and I agree with them, but marriage requires finding the right person, not just the closest person in your little Jewish village so you can make more Jewish babies as the ot was built around. And no premarital sex is a barrier to finding that right person
Jesus is the only one who's always correct, everybody else's teachings are largely opinions and culturally influenced.

>muh ceremonial/sacrificial/dietary laws
Fuck off aquinas you can't pick and choose which laws you want to follow, they come as one

Degenerate is just a useless buzzword for "things I don't like", but yes, that is what will happen at far higher rates. Your sex life will suffer for it if you marry too late, and your marriage will suffer if you marry too early.

>everyone who isn't #redpilled like me and doesn't believe in nonsensical concepts without evidence isn't #woke #realchristcuckhours
Not an argument

probably bataille, yah

what he says?

That people who had penchant to do bad things did bad things more often. It does nothing to prove that there did not exist people who wished to live in an upright manner, and that people only chose to live uprightly in response to some form of law. People organized themselves in mutually beneficial (see: non-malicious) communities long before written law or nation or government was developed to prescribe them not to.

>promiscuity is okay, trust me....

Firstly, why are you ignoring the verse where Jesus says any man who looks upon a woman with lust is committing adultery? How can someone go around being promiscuous/fornicating without lusting after the women he fancies? You aren't making sense.

Secondly, after Jesus tightened the rules on divorce his apostles were worried and asked why even marry if it's so risky? And Jesus replied not everyone can accept such a ruling and reminded the apostles that some make themselves eunuchs (celibate) for the sake of heaven and some are made eunuchs (celibate) by circumstance. So if strict divorce rules makes marriage seem risky Jesus' alternative wasn't "just be promiscuous instead" his alternative was "become eunuchs/celibate".

>And the making divorce harder and describing marriage as making one flesh from two is fine, and I agree with them

Jesus says [porneias] fornication or any kind of sexual immorality (i.e pre-marital sex) gives the man grounds for divorcing his wife. Matthew 5:32, and that a divorced woman who remarries is committing adultery. Why would Jesus not allow remarriage, but allow women to be promiscuous? Again I don't think you've read the scriptures carefully about this topic.

And why are you saying we should also follow the OT laws, and then turn around and make an exception for fornication/promiscuity which is unambiguously forbidden in the OT and NT? And then you say the apostles who quoted Jesus shouldn't be taken seriously, that they are culturally influenced, but when they quote Jesus' they are correct and trustworthy. You aren't making any sense.

>Degenerate is just a useless buzzword for "things I don't like", but yes, that is what will happen at far higher rates.

Degenerate is a word that signifies man or woman's literal degeneration as a person, instead of aspiring to higher virtues and self-discipline he or she becomes a slave to passions, lusts, gluttony, egoism, greed, and all manner of vile affections. They start small and gradually become worse and worse.

>Your sex life will suffer for it if you marry too late, and your marriage will suffer if you marry too early.

No such thing as marrying too late or too early, except in terms of biological programming/mental maturity. Having pre-marital sex does not benefit you except to satisfy lusts.

t. Leviathan

>What are some of the most interesting philosophical views on sexuality in your opinion?

Here is what is interesting to me: the theory that sex drives absolutely everything we do.

I didn't ignore that verse, I addressed it and how it's not relevant unless you maintain all the ot laws.
That seems like a factual observation rather than a recommendation, might be my translation though

How do you know "sexual immorality" means pre-marital sex? And extra-marital sex was grounds for divorce and worse anyway
Again, adultery is only significant if you maintain the rules of the ot

Your reading comprehension is terrible, I said if you want to take a puritanical view of sex that's supported by the ot, you have to take all the ot laws. If you want to be like christ you have to follow what christ says

>higher virtues
Nice spook. It's entirely possible to have self discipline and pursue pleasure without having to escalate it. That may be difficult to consider since Christianity is a book of guides for weak minded people, but it can and does happen.

If you marry before you have sexual experience and can know if you're sexually compatible, then you've married too early. If you've abstained from sex and wasted time you could have spent having sex, getting to know your body and what you like and getting to know what women like, then you've married too late. And pre-marital sex has the aforementioned benefits.

I want to fuck that girl.

Which Christian view? There isn't one singular viewpoint, many Christians interpret sex in different ways.

>I addressed it and how it's not relevant unless you maintain all the ot laws.

Initially you said only what Jesus says matters and is correct and he never outlawed promiscuity/fornication so its okay to do it; but if we want to accept the "puritanical view of sex" then we have to accept all the hebrew laws of the OT.

Now you're saying if you want to accept even what Jesus says then you have to also accept all the OT??

I don't get it.

>How do you know "sexual immorality" means pre-marital sex?

The best translations are fornication (which means pre-marital sex) and general sexual immorality which could include fornication and adultery and other acts...either way fornication falls under the sexual immorality umbrella that would be familiar to israelites and Jesus' audience.

>Nice spooks
>virtues are spooks, chastity is harmful
>christianity is for weak minded people

neat insults.

>If you've abstained from sex and wasted time you could have spent having sex, getting to know your body and what you like and getting to know what women like, then you've married too late.

sexual compatibility is created by caring and patient people.
you learn your body with your wife, not with random strangers.

Jesus said if marriage is too hard for you be a eunuch.

>what Christian view

That Catholic-Orthodox view, is essentially the same for 1.5 billion Christians.

what i mean is even if individuals differ, their churches teach essentially the same thing

Fucking Kant ruined sex for me. Whenever I'm fucking just before I finish I think of the categorical imperative. Everytime without fail it makes me feel terrible for doing this to some poor girl. Even though we're both just looking to have some fun. I feel awful at using them as a means to an end even if they're doing the same to me.

I want to get off this ride.

why

I always found it illogical to say that sexual interest have no bearing on the actual personality of a person. I don't think I could ever respect a woman who acts chaste and respectable normally but gets rammed up the ass in bed and likes to be choked or whatever.
Something about that idea really irks me. It's just disgusting.

why praise logic?

Your reading comprehension is getting worse with each post, I'm going to ignore your first bit of whitetext and if you actually read my posts you'll realise what you think I've said entirely contradicts what I've actually said ITT

I'd like some additional verses used in the same way to confirm the best translation is premarital sex, ideally. And if jesus was privy to the infinite knowledge of God, his preaching should be just as familiar to us now as it was to his audience at the time, tbqh.

Virtue is a spook, quite obviously. I didn't say chastity is harmful, but if you don't plan on being celibate for the entirety of your life, it can be
Christianity is very much a doctrine for (among other things) the avoidance of weak minded people who can't think for themselves making themselves useless to those in power. That's not a bad thing or an insult, it's am observation and Tbf it's a good and useful thing.

Not really some people just have different libidos and are just incompatible, and you often can't fix those differences, especially different libidos. And that will cause long term resentment in the marriage

No, jesus observed that the people who don't want to get married can be celibate

get

humanae vitae

You're being irrational

>e-everybody else is praising something, I'm not the only one who needs to prostrate myself before am external entity, right guys,
goaway

lol i guess praise was the wrong word, why hold logic in such high esteem would be a better way to articulate my thoughts. why do you do such a greentext where you assume so much about what i meant with that question?

Because it's quite a common argument for christcucks to turn around and say unbelievers worship logic, or science

t. Reddit Christian

i feel like we should fuck whenever we want to and recent media has overhyped the wrondoings of rapist

Kant was like me. I refuse to have sex with anyone ever again, and my life became much better after I came to this decision.

Seems like a mutually beneficial arrangement, there's not any reason to feel bad

Nice argument

> mutually beneficial arrangement

mutually detrimental

Just read Freud. After that you won't be able to take any other ''theory'' of sexuality seriously.

>Just read Freud. After that you won't be able to take any other ''theory'' of sexuality seriously.
Including Freud's

I remember reading Freud at age 13 and using him as justification for fapping to mother incest fantasies.

Smart kid.

I know you meant it as an insult but it's not untrue. Freud himself was not analysed and thus fell into the same traps at times that he so cleverly pointed out in others. A well-read student of psychoanalysis will learn to question certain aspects of Freud's theory, such as not having included the Electra complex after coining Oedipus, as telling of his own unresolved complexities.

Interesting, I stopped relying on my oedipal fantasies after reading him and being an analysand.

why? and why is it better? are you sure?

detrimental?

it is precisely because it is a law in the first place that people do not commit crimes

People create the law in the first place because they come to understand that certain behavior is wrong.

>tfw it's too late for me to ever get laid
>Good looking, Veeky Forums, intelligent
>Horrible personality
What do , Veeky Forums?

Stop being autistic and understand people

And, I'll determine what's Veeky Forums, post body

You know your nonsense doesn't become any more valid the more you post it.

>Post lewds
Nah, I'll post by weights instead
190 squat
280 deadlift
175 bench press

Well defined abs, about a 12:20 two mile. 5'11 175. Still skelly but you get the picture.

Anyways, I'm autistic af plz help

>280 deadlift
*260

>Good looking, Veeky Forums, intelligent
>Anyways, I'm autistic af plz help

Feign a bit of modesty every now and then, huh?

>5'11
Sorry bro, you'll never make it

B-b-but I was promised we were all gonna make it

>modesty
Just being honest.

>it is because you want to please the higher entity and understand that his rules are good for you.

So you're basically just a sub in a chastity belt. That's way more degenerate than just banging some cute woman.

user, these terms and practices you're describing only have any appeal because they are a perverted image of man's proper relationship to God.

Only those of us who were gifted with non-childlike statues are going to make it. You have a good chance of making if you turn to pedophilia though

> derailing the thread with arguments about a shitty religion

Plz leave

What was his opinion though? Apart from the entry about waiting until an appropriate age I cannot recall much else. Other Stoics have said more, but maybe my translation of the Meditations was shit and excluded some allusions.

I have this really fucked up guilt complex about sex, casual or otherwise, because it always feels so selfish. Sounds like Kant is right up my alley here. In what work are his sexual ethics explicated?

It can only be moral if 1) It's between consenting adults and 2) Does not lead to procreation. Come at me natalists.

Why don't you try reading something that will help you get over this stupid, neurotic and ideological gripe instead of intensifying it, user? Kantian ethics are notoriously autistic, don't fall into that meme.

Just read Groundworks of the Metaphysic of Morals, it can be derived from that.

Only do Critique of Practical Reason if you're willing to spend hundreds of hours in extreme tedium. Kant is the biggest chore to read.

Evola attained vast spiritual power through tantric orgies with hot aryan babes

I believe in one eternal marriage. I believe in not having casual sex and exposing yourself to disease, heartache, and selfish abuse. I know it is tempting while you are young and I myself lapsed when I was younger but premarital (and extramarital) sex is absolutely degenerate and morally wrong from an objective standpoint.

I would suggest the catechism of the catholic church and eros and the mysteries of love.

Agree, though I only really enjoy it if I'm in love

i enjoy it but not for all the trouble you have to go through

ur pathetic

slavboy says a whole lot of nothing in this one, desu

Because then I would have to admit that my sexual guilt was unfounded which quickly shoots me into a rabbit hole of unfounded neuroses and self-punishing behaviors that I'm not ready to deal with.

Thanks.

The Christian worldview of sex, particularly the puritanical view, is pernicious and influences a huge number of people. For example, this poor sod
Who thinks pre-marital sex is absolutely degenerate and morally wrong from an objective standpoint, yet would be hard pressed to substantiate such.

So, simply by the virtue of the numbers who believe it, it must be addressed

Are you circumcised?