SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory

SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> General BDSM Discussion

Message

BitaTruble -> SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 4:09:11 PM)
Cliff notes version of Raskolnikov's Extraordinary Man Theory as penned by Dostoevsky in Crime and Punishment: Men are "somewhat arbitrarily" divided into two groups, the ordinary and the extrodinary. "The first class of people preserve and people [populate] the world, the second move the world and lead it to its goal." Rather a sheep and shepherd sort of thought as Raskolnikov views the first group as servile or even docile though quite necessary. He further goes on to postulate that extraordinary men by their very nature must be criminals who step outside the bounds of society in order to achieve change. This may include mass murder of innocents or what have you but it's not my purpose here to go on at length about such extremes whether they be positive or negative in nature but, rather to address a lesser degree; there are plenty of folks here who do step outside the bounds of society in order to pursue change albeit usually in regard to our own life circumstance or views and rarely (though sometimes) at the expense of the well-being or peace of mind of the masses - to a point, of course. I think most folks just want to be left alone to pursue their lives as they see fit, but some small few do want to bridge gaps (or widen them) and open minds (or close them) to new thoughts and ideas and do so via the practice and embracing of SM. In other words, they seek change. The Marquis de Sade was one such man. Roland Loomis (aka Fakir Musofar) is another. There have been others, of course who may fall on either side of a good/evil paradigm (or somewhere in between). A few questions to ponder from a Raskolnikovian viewpoint: Should those who seek change (even if it's simply a change of thought) via SM practices be viewed as criminals since consent doesn't fall under a Raskolnikov microscope to alleviate liability in a given practice? Given that Dostoevsky viewed de Sade as evil/nihilistic and that Crime and Punishment (and to an even greater extent The Brothers Karamozov most notably the character of Ivan) spoke in repudiation of de Sade, does embracing the Extraordinary Man Theory automatically make one a nihilst? According, again to Raskolnikov, as the law of nature arbitrarily divides us into one of the two groups, which one would most likely host the majority of SM practioners and why? Is it more likely that those of a dominant persuassion would fit into the Extraordinary Man Theory as opposed to those of a submissive mindset or given the theory itself, are they equally likely to fit? Just a few thoughts as I take a break from studying.

bipolarber -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 4:48:21 PM)
I think there is some truth to this... but, as the old truisim goes... some people are born great, others become great, and still others have greatness thrust upon them. Sometimes, you can change the course of humanity just by being in the worng place, at the right time; James Brady got in the path of the bullet meant for Reagan; the crew of the Enola Gay dropped the bomb; an otherwise unremarkable researcher noticed that a bread mold seemed to be killing off bacteria, and we got pennecillin. (sp?) Oh... and just a little observation: What makes you believe that Doms are the only ones who fit the "Extraordinary Man Theory?" I found that a little... insulting.

ResidentSadist -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 5:01:36 PM)
I have many facets to my personality and desires. I enjoy indulging them. Being viewed as a criminal wouldn’t bother me… but it wouldn’t become part of my self image either. I stand accountable emotionally for the ‘evil’ (so to speak) in my life and do not wash it away with the absolution of being acceptable S&M practices. I embrace the darkness of it. I like the dark side of man’s nature as much as the light. I see and enjoy the affirmation of human nature and its perspectives that people like Fakir Musafar and Marquee De Sade bring. I do not murder people like Raskolnikov did so I do not have a torn feeling about my inner balance. Nice thread, thanks.

BitaTruble -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 5:05:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bipolarber Oh... and just a little observation: What makes you believe that Doms are the only ones who fit the "Extraordinary Man Theory?" I found that a little... insulting. I have no idea what you're talking about or how you got the idea that I think such a thing from my post. Can you cut and paste where that thought comes from because I'd really like to fix it if people are going to draw such a conclusion regarding my personal belief. It's inaccurate to say the least. I have yet to put forth my own ideas on the theory as I didn't want to color other viewpoints.

Level -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 5:06:47 PM)
Creating change does not, or should not, automatically brand one as a criminal..... although, there are those who would like to see that. Submissives create change as much as dominants, I think. [8\|] They are the other side of the coin, so to speak; every action of the dominant, there is the action of the submissive. Both are subversive, in as much as any of it is. Interesting thoughts, Celeste [:D]

ZenNihilist -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 5:13:27 PM)
I've embraced nihilism as a place where I am able to think freely and get things done. I believe that many subs do the same thing, and are actually accomplishing a lot in their submissiveness.

softness -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 5:16:17 PM)
It often takes someone drastic and radical to achieve what could otherwise not be done. It takes someone who refuses to go with the flow .. to find a new direction. Through history the greatest of advances and discoveries have been made because one person, or a group of people went against the common consensus.Without the man who though ... "Ooooh ... I wonder what is in the next valley?" We would still be scraping animal skins clean with bits of bone in the back of a stinking cane in Africa. Great men have pushed society on .. forced us to evolve and lead the wave of change by example. Often however ... they are seen as criminals because the contradict the norm ... they are blasphemers ... they are heretics ... they are madmen ... they are criminal. Society will doggedly protect its "normal" familiar way of life because for most people the idea of drastic change is terrifying. People who would threaten the status quo are dangerous and dubbed outlaws ... you see it at all points in history. Look at any contempoary writer of the Later Republic ... it is the novus homo ... the New Men who destroyed The Republic if you listen to the optimates ... find a Populares historian however ... and you see the novus homo breathing new life into the dying husk of the old order ... even as they are branded criminals and outlaws and cast out of Rome. I don't think BDSM in and of itself is challenging the world order. I think that certain sections of the "community" certainly give a lot of credibility to the argument we should be allowed to express out personal freedom in which ever way we choose (obviously consent blah blah) Some aspects of BDSM are just activites (in my opinion) .. an activity that takes on huge importance for some people ... but its an activity. ... Some relationships actually become challeging of accepted behaviour ....and may in some tiny way contribute to a change in social values am not touching the question about Doms/subs sheep and super men .... am too sleepy for that debate as an aside Celeste ... if this is what you can do with study fatugue .... please God never stop studying grins

chamberqueen -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 6:09:54 PM)
On the idea of extraordinary people, one person in every 50 has a genius level IQ. There is no test for amount of empathy, but my guess is it would be about proportionate. Studies say that people in the BDSM lifestyle tend to have higher than normal IQ. I've seen some that have incredible empathy. One without being tempered by the other still leaves the person lacking. I don't think that "criminal" is nearly as apt a description as "thinking outside of the box". Does someone being in the lifestyle make them extraordinary? Not at all. There are a lot of jerks and wannabes. Is being extraordinary more likely to happen to Doms or to subs? It can happen with either, or with switches. Is someone who seems extraordinary to one going to seem the same way to all? Highly unlikely. Some people make great posters, others great friends, others great to have a session with. Like with any group, there will be those that come across as if they are very full of themselves, those that come across as airheads because they would rather make a "funny" comment than a deep one, but we see only the top layer of most people. There are still prejudices and preconceptions, those who feel they have an open mind until it comes to talking about x, and those who seem to show no compassion. I came into the lifestyle assuming that everyone was enlightened, unselfish, and willing to help others. When I found out that those people were in the minority they became to truly extraordinary to me.

BitaTruble -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 7:23:40 PM)
::snipped only for the sake of brevity:: quote: ORIGINAL: softness People who would threaten the status quo are dangerous and dubbed outlaws ... you see it at all points in history. Look at any contempoary writer of the Later Republic ... it is the novus homo ... the New Men who destroyed The Republic if you listen to the optimates ... find a Populares historian however ... and you see the novus homo breathing new life into the dying husk of the old order ... even as they are branded criminals and outlaws and cast out of Rome. Oh, I quite agree. There are those who also took what was intended as progressive (often the ideology of others) and twisted it to use it for nefarious purpose as well. History is equally repleat with examples that show such concepts (Brownshirts come to mind.) The Extraordinary Man Theory goes to the extreme in its doctrine with such ideologies as mass murder in order to bring about new discoveries, ideas or concepts hence the repudiation by Dostoevsky of de Sade (as monster) and a nihilist mentality. Most folks on these fora probably don't carry things out quite that far. [;)] As I think this through, it seems to fall into a 'end justifies means' model with any and all necessary actions up to and including the most heinous crimes being justifiable to the Extraordinary Man so long as the goals are met which basically seems to marry quite well with nihilism as a rejection of religious and moral principals. The Extraordinary Man would have to be an egoist at the very least even if actions, writings or teachings culminate in greater good as it is still one man's ideology of greater good rather than vast majority. Thank God for some of those guys though, huh? ::grins:: quote: I don't think BDSM in and of itself is challenging the world order. I think that certain sections of the "community" certainly give a lot of credibility to the argument we should be allowed to express out personal freedom in which ever way we choose (obviously consent blah blah) Some aspects of BDSM are just activites (in my opinion) .. an activity that takes on huge importance for some people ... but its an activity. ... Some relationships actually become challeging of accepted behaviour ....and may in some tiny way contribute to a change in social values I actually disagree with this and do believe the practice and application of SM is challenging world views perhaps not at an advanced or fast pace, but slowly and steadly to be sure. Forty years ago Snidley Whiplash was a villain for tying poor, innocent Nell to the train tracks whereas last week, Lois was letting Peter know the safeword was banana and Jihadists are looking at Western culture as a decadent plague to be wiped from the face of the Earth. Forty years ago, SM was anathema to most everyone of 'good character' and morals which was why the practice was so often hidden from societies sensibilities. I don't think it can be denied that changes have already taken place in that regard. There are too many of us out of the closet for that particular beast to ever be shoved back in and hidden from the masses. quote: am not touching the question about Doms/subs sheep and super men .... am too sleepy for that debate lol .. okay, fair enough! quote: as an aside Celeste ... if this is what you can do with study fatugue .... please God never stop studying grins [sm=oddballs.gif] edited because it seems as if my tiredness is manifesting in poor spelling and grammar!

Leatherist -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 8:16:08 PM)
Shrugs...it's something that the Lavey cos seems to believe in heavily. I'm not sure I really agree with thier viewpoint on it-because occasional wolves arise from amoung "the herd". But for the most part? There seems to be a big difference between people who thrive on apathy and mediocrity-and those who are never satisfied unless they are making SOME kind of change they find to be useful, and that excites thier passions.

BitaTruble -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 8:32:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist Shrugs...it's something that the Lavey cos seems to believe in heavily. Hmm.. interesting. Do you think that ideologies such as Extraordinary Man Theory were precursers to groups like the Satanists? Now that you mention it, they sure seem to have a close alliance and I hadn't thought about such a connection. quote: I'm not sure I really agree with thier viewpoint on it-because occasional wolves arise from amoung "the herd". But for the most part? There seems to be a big difference between people who thrive on apathy and mediocrity-and those who are never satisfied unless they are making SOME kind of change they find to be useful, and that excites thier passions. Aside from the term useful, yes, I agree with this as well. Whether good, bad or indifferent, I don't think it's really debatable.

Leatherist -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 8:43:04 PM)
Well,they also tend to see some genetic link to the proclivity. I DO wonder if there is some sort of throwback addish link there.....Farmers vs Hunters?

BitaTruble -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 8:54:46 PM)
Perhaps a combination. A predisposition coupled with opportunity. Bipolar pointed out that 'right time, right place' sort of thing. I believe there have been studies which show proclivities towards things like alcoholism but if one has never taken a drink you'd be hard pressed to call them an alcoholic. I think this is the same sort of thing. You have to take some action .. predisposition isn't enough in and of itself.

Leatherist -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 9:01:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble Perhaps a combination. A predisposition coupled with opportunity. Bipolar pointed out that 'right time, right place' sort of thing. I believe there have been studies which show proclivities towards things like alcoholism but if one has never taken a drink you'd be hard pressed to call them an alcoholic. I think this is the same sort of thing. You have to take some action .. predisposition isn't enough in and of itself. But predispostion is allied to programming intake. In societies, authority figures and cultures atempt to inculcate individuals into compliance. Some go along with this. Others find inputs and ideas that run contrary-and then act upon them. Some are even intellegent and devious enough to change the societies, and subvert the origional programming-while allying them to more positive aspects of the culture as a support. Hitler's program was a prime example of cultural subversion.

BitaTruble -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 9:19:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist But predispostion is allied to programming intake. In societies, authority figures and cultures atempt to inculcate individuals into compliance. Some go along with this. Others find inputs and ideas that run contrary-and then act upon them. Some are even intellegent and devious enough to change the societies, and subvert the origional programming-while allying them to more positive aspects of the culture as a support. Hitler's program was a prime example of cultural subversion. It's all part of the tapestry. Had Hitler been allowed into art school and all that. [;)] While I think Hitler is a perfect example of the Extraordinary Man theory I don't want to dwell to much outside the scope of the OP and would like rein things in a bit and keep the thread focused on SM and how the theory might pertain to what's going on with today's modern society. I do find the entire subject fascinating though and perhaps will address it again in the off topic section at some future time.

Leatherist -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 9:26:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist But predispostion is allied to programming intake. In societies, authority figures and cultures atempt to inculcate individuals into compliance. Some go along with this. Others find inputs and ideas that run contrary-and then act upon them. Some are even intellegent and devious enough to change the societies, and subvert the origional programming-while allying them to more positive aspects of the culture as a support. Hitler's program was a prime example of cultural subversion. It's all part of the tapestry. Had Hitler been allowed into art school and all that. [;)] While I think Hitler is a perfect example of the Extraordinary Man theory I don't want to dwell to much outside the scope of the OP and would like rein things in a bit and keep the thread focused on SM and how the theory might pertain to what's going on with today's modern society. I do find the entire subject fascinating though and perhaps will address it again in the off topic section at some future time. I really don't see all that many "extraordinary men" in the bdsm scene. I see a lot of guys ass kissing stereotypes and copying gays. Conforming to not being "vanilla" in the way that everyone else does it, does not make you "unique". It only makes you a sheep with a different colored pelt. Two things I did learn from researching the cos, that were of value. 1. Move beyond the need for internal or external validation to find strength. There will always be those you are both superior and inferior to. Be satisfied in using your abilities and talents to their best.. 2. There is always a THIRD side.

BitaTruble -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 9:53:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist I really don't see all that many "extraordinary men" in the bdsm scene. I see a lot of guys ass kissing stereotypes and copying gays. Conforming to not being "vanilla" in the way that everyone else does it, does not make you "unique". It only makes you a sheep with a different colored pelt. I don't think there are that many extraordinary men in any walk of life and SM is no exception but I do think that Loomis qualifies at least from my understanding of the theory. Loomis just happens to be a gentle soul and his message and manner speaks volumes in a way that fire and brimstone can't touch. I keep saying 'man' as if I mean a single person, but of course, a woman or a group can also qualify and to that end, I think there are others who fit the criteria in the same sort of way that Loomis does. Orgs, even forums such as these have changed the viewpoints of a lot of people. Perhaps it's not world wide (yet!), but certainly it makes an impact and I don't think you can deny the possibility of a domino effect. quote: Two things I did learn from researching the cos, that were of value. 1. Move beyond the need for internal or external validation to find strength. There will always be those you are both superior and inferior to. Be satisfied in using your abilities and talents to their best.. 2. There is always a THIRD side. Having just read the KKK website last week for another thread, I'm going to pass on COS for now. I can only take so much 'education' in such a short frame of time and I have other, more pressing studies at the moment. I'll keep an open mind about it, but it was never something which was of special interest to me.

Leatherist -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 10:00:15 PM)
You need not bother. For the most part, I only found a bunch of puffed up self agrandizing twits. The two maxims I quoted were pretty much all I found of any interest.

BitaTruble -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 10:08:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist You need not bother. For the most part, I only found a bunch of puffed up self agrandizing twits. The two maxims I quoted were pretty much all I found of any interest. Ah, okay but if there's a test later, I'm going to copy off you. [sm=writing.gif]

Leatherist -> RE: SM & the Extraordinary Man Theory (7/5/2008 10:13:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BitaTruble quote: ORIGINAL: Leatherist You need not bother. For the most part, I only found a bunch of puffed up self agrandizing twits. The two maxims I quoted were pretty much all I found of any interest. Ah, okay but if there's a test later, I'm going to copy off you. [sm=writing.gif] As you wish. [:D] One thing I find beyond amusing in sub profiles.. many of them seem to insist on finding a "superior man". That conforms to thier exact specifications.. The irony of that just kills me. Especially when they consider themselves inferior* to that person.* Can a worm define god?

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125