RE: BDSM and philosophy

RE: BDSM and philosophy (Full Version)

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

Message

Whenready -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/2/2012 12:27:45 AM)
Well, if you do not believe in omnipotence as a universal goal, you will eventually have to wage war on tribes that DO believe in omnipotence (like the Germans), which in turn will force you into sadism in order to beat us. Nope. I don't have to wage war on anyone. I also don't think that Germans believe in omnipotence, though I accept that some individuals who happen to be German might. Various tribes / groups have over time had "the answer". It doesn't ever seem to have workd out that simply, except for the ones who were simply wrong. So, it would be better if omnipotence was shared as a common goal by all cultures. See what I mean? Again, no. We can't all be omnipotent. Only Chuck Norris can be that. As an aside, wonders if kana has also read Clancy (armed robbery writ large) or whether they're referencing the same source.

crazyml -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/2/2012 2:18:03 AM)
Honestly... (and in a genuine attempt not to appear snarky)... Nope. I would prescribe a little less Freud and Nietzsche and a little more Hobbes and Rousseau. If you're sincerely interested in the philosophy, I'd advise you to hop on over to a philo forum (google is your friend here), and try this out there - But expect a pretty brutal response! [Ed to change "diagnose" for "prescribe"]

Intellectual -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/2/2012 7:37:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: chemeli What kind of social problems? If they are transferring their control addiction as protective instinct (which in your list, you claim to be the yin and yang of one another) isnt that much more about them transferring values and mindset ? How are values being social problems? I guess, this particular philosophy only makes sense if you accept that every human has both dominant and submissive tendencies. Since your profile states that you are a submissive female (rather than a switch), you might have problems understanding (or rather accepting) that control addiction is an expression of dominant sexual desires. But since you insist on being purely submissive, you probably think that control addiction is a mindset, a strategy to achieve certain social goals, which it clearly shouldn't be.

chemeli -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/2/2012 8:10:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Intellectual quote: ORIGINAL: chemeli What kind of social problems? If they are transferring their control addiction as protective instinct (which in your list, you claim to be the yin and yang of one another) isnt that much more about them transferring values and mindset ? How are values being social problems? I guess, this particular philosophy only makes sense if you accept that every human has both dominant and submissive tendencies. Since your profile states that you are a submissive female (rather than a switch), you might have problems understanding (or rather accepting) that control addiction is an expression of dominant sexual desires. But since you insist on being purely submissive, you probably think that control addiction is a mindset, a strategy to achieve certain social goals, which it clearly shouldn't be. I'm a control freak in life and also about my personality, but it has nothing to do with sexuality. Control addiction isnt a strategy (the way i see it), it's just the way certain people are and i dont think sexuality plays a role in it (unless you want to freud things up). We'll have to agree to disagree on this. Moving on.

FrostedFlake -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/2/2012 10:16:39 AM)
quote: Hello all! I'm German and I've recently come to the conclusion that BDSM is ultimately inevitable, ... Yeah, uhmmm... have you ever noticed that certain nationalities TEND to view things in a certain ...odd... way. "Dominance, Control, Regimentation, BECAUSE I SAID SO...And the like." Sound familiar? You might not think so, and you don't have to, but that IS the way the history books read. On another topic, your theory is garbage.

Restyles -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/2/2012 10:42:51 AM)
Philosophy definition (or something like this!) Questions that cant be answered raised by people incapable of answering the questions that can be.

Salinedion -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/2/2012 7:44:00 PM)
Google MasT (master/slave convention -happening right now!). They will have lots of workshop idea's that touch on your kind of thinking. One speaker from a couple of years back (Slave Carolyn) spoke about the difference between therapy (stuff that works out deep life conflicts -proceed with caution) and things that were therapeutic (mostly nurturing and feel-good stuff -maybe what you're after?). Me? I like my sex and psychotherapy separate. I see only headaches (and bad sex) in trying to turn S+M into self-improvement. I have a low-ego partner who likes herself. Mentor-wise, I'm just going to quit while I'm ahead. I hope you likewise hook up with someone who's checking off your sane actualization aspirations on their own time.

bigregrets -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 3:46:28 AM)
Your theory reminds me ever so slightly of Timothy Learys 8 circuit of consciousness. are you familiar with ? he was a university professor...did a lot of research with Lsd.. was imprisoned... and as we speak..his ashes are in a satellite orbiting the earth... no joke.

NiceButMeanGirl -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 4:41:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: Hello all! I'm German and I've recently come to the conclusion that BDSM is ultimately inevitable, ... Yeah, uhmmm... have you ever noticed that certain nationalities TEND to view things in a certain ...odd... way. "Dominance, Control, Regimentation, BECAUSE I SAID SO...And the like." Sound familiar? You might not think so, and you don't have to, but that IS the way the history books read. Umm, you're referring to Hitler I'm sure. I'm German and don't see things that way at all. Hitler and his horrors are a total embarrassment to me. NBMG

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 5:40:36 AM)
I'm not sure what begin German has to do with your "philisophy" except that you've read a great deal of Nietzsche. I have to agree with Crazyml, you need to read some Hobbes and Rousseau as well, since your "philosophy" as currently stated is hugely skewed towards your (obvious and transparent) hypothesis, which is that all people all evolving towards sadism, therefore, that you are a sadist makes you on the frontlines of evolutionary anthropology. What can I say? Poppy Cock !! Human's ability to become violent has nothing to do with your philosophy or anyone else's. As Kana stated, man's natural state is self-sustainable or survival. Anything that threatens survival will be met with violence. The thing is, what threatens YOUR survival, and what threatens MINE, may be entirely different. Some examples: Your survival may not be threatened unless you are dying of thirst. From what I have heard, being even mildly along this particular continuum is quite gruesome. If someone had water and you had to commit violence to get it, you would. Everyone would, b/c when it comes to keeping ourselves alive, humans will revert to a pure mammal state. Another's survival may be threatened if they don't have the pair of shoes they want for the dance. Now, how that ties into their personal sense of survival, in terms of ego, self-entitlement, self-esteem, and what all we don't know about the human brain and how personality is developed, I will not get into here. But people have been killed over the right pair of shoes. Every single person's point at which they will be violent to sustain their personal self will fall someone between these two extreme examples. Which is round about way of attempting to explain why people are violent or sadistic is not something you can set down in a handy dandy list. Philosophy has often attempted to explain WHY people are violent and sadistic. I go with the Eastern mode myself. Because they are.

Intellectual -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 6:01:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bigregrets Your theory reminds me ever so slightly of Timothy Learys 8 circuit of consciousness. are you familiar with ? he was a university professor...did a lot of research with Lsd.. was imprisoned... and as we speak..his ashes are in a satellite orbiting the earth... no joke. Thank you very much. I didn't know about Timothy Leary and his work on eight neural circuits. I just looked it up on wikipedia and I'm quite fascinated. I haven't had much time to dig into it. But if you are interested in these things, I can tell you that the number eight has been stuck in my head for quite some time now. I'm not an expert in philosophy, nor am I an expert in psychology or neural sciences. But unrelated to BDSM, I have another philosophical theory, which goes like this: As far as I'm aware, there are eight main religious belief systems and eight corresponding moral philosophies, which show some similarities. Here's the list: #1: Ancient Egyptian/Roman religion Greek philosophy of Sophism The element of amoralism. Penalties and punishments by superior moral beings are dismissed as coincidence or as an act of god. #2: Hinduism Greek/Roman philosophy of Stoa a la Seneca Non-violence at all costs. Gandhi resisted the British colonialists through non-violence, while Seneca poisoned himself without hesitation after receiving the order to do so from a Roman emperor. #3: Buddhism French philosophy of Rene Descartes The dualism between mind and body, meditation. #4: Christianity English philosophy of Utilitarianism The golden rule of the holy bible "Treat your neighbour as you whish to be treated yourself" is pretty much the summary of utilitarianism. #5: Judaism Italian philosophy of Machiavelli The Jews think of themselves as the chosen people. Machiavelli believed that power and respect can be earned by following certain moral principles. #6: Islam German philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche Both the Koran and Nietzsche's book "Jenseits von Gut und Boese" ("Beyond Good and Evil") are a recitation of pure spite and malice. #7: Nature religions which worship female fertility goddesses German philosophy of Arthur Schoppenhauer Melancholy and pessimism, sexual self-castration through artwork. #8: Nature religions which worship male war gods German philosophy of Immanuel Kant Both the use of reason and the preparation for war are not seen as a means to an end, but as an end in itself. Now, if you are an expert in moral philosophy and think I'm totally wrong, go ahead and slap me!

Intellectual -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 6:04:27 AM)
No, I'm actually not a big fan of Nietzsche. I don't know how you come to this conclusion.

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 6:14:38 AM)
It was an assumption based on the fact you told us you were German. If I was wrong, please accept my mea culpa I find it extremely interesting that this is the only thing in my entire post you responded to. Also, that you ignored Kana's post entirely. I would very much appreciate a more thorough response to my post, and look forward to a comprehensive response to Kana's post as well.

LordOdinn -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 6:51:30 AM)
I'm an historian, rather than a philosopher, but I find your copling of various ideas both simplistic and confusing at the same time. quote: ORIGINAL: Intellectual As far as I'm aware, there are eight main religious belief systems and eight corresponding moral philosophies, which show some similarities. Here's the list: #1: Ancient Egyptian/Roman religion Greek philosophy of Sophism The element of amoralism. Penalties and punishments by superior moral beings are dismissed as coincidence or as an act of god. Sophism isn't a philosophical school, that I'm aware of. Generally, the classical deities aren't "moral beings", just more powerful than mortals. I can see them being called immoral,though certain dieties,such as the Furies ARE personifications of moral retribution. quote: ORIGINAL: Intellectual #2: Hinduism Greek/Roman philosophy of Stoa a la Seneca Non-violence at all costs. Gandhi resisted the British colonialists through non-violence, while Seneca poisoned himself without hesitation after receiving the order to do so from a Roman emperor. This one is a total non sequitur. Stoicism has absolutely nothing in common with Ghandi's non-violence. Stoicism appealed to the extremely war-like Romans as a philosophy for tough endurance of misfortune, including suicide. Seneca committed suicide to: 1) avoid turture and 2) because under Roman law his heirs couldn't inherit if he was executed. quote: ORIGINAL: Intellectual #3: Buddhism French philosophy of Rene Descartes The dualism between mind and body, meditation. The ultra-Catholic Descartes and Buddhism??????? Explain, please. quote: ORIGINAL: Intellectual #4: Christianity English philosophy of Utilitarianism The golden rule of the holy bible "Treat your neighbor as you wish to be treated yourself" is pretty much the summary of utilitarianism. I can see some parallel here, though Utilitarianism is based on practical, real world application while Christianity is based on a God-given moral idea. quote: ORIGINAL: Intellectual #5: Judaism Italian philosophy of Machiavelli The Jews think of themselves as the chosen people. Machiavelli believed that power and respect can be earned by following certain moral principles. Not even close. See above. Machiavelli is Utilitarianism writ large. I've never heard anyone EVER argue that Machiavelli argued from moral principles. He was the founder of modern political theory based on pure utility, not ethics. quote: ORIGINAL: Intellectual #6: Islam German philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche Both the Koran and Nietzsche's book "Jenseits von Gut und Boese" ("Beyond Good and Evil") are a recitation of pure spite and malice. Again, the "Will to Power" and divine revelation have nothing in common at the fundamental level. quote: ORIGINAL: Intellectual #7: Nature religions which worship female fertility goddesses German philosophy of Arthur Schoppenhauer Melancholy and pessimism, sexual self-castration through artwork. Not familiar enough with Schoppenhauer to comment. quote: ORIGINAL: Intellectual #8: Nature religions which worship male war gods German philosophy of Immanuel Kant Both the use of reason and the preparation for war are not seen as a means to an end, but as an end in itself. Not sure what parallel you see with this duality. The pagan warrior pantheons are the antithesis of reason,exulting violence for violence's sake and Kant, who was a pacifist and a believer in the virtue of pure reason. quote: ORIGINAL: Intellectual Now, if you are an expert in moral philosophy and think I'm totally wrong, go ahead and slap me! Not so much a slap as a critique. Interesting thread.

Intellectual -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 8:52:12 AM)
Well, I haven't really caught the red line or essential point in your post. But let me respond to this: quote: ORIGINAL: ChatteParfaitt Another's survival may be threatened if they don't have the pair of shoes they want for the dance. Now, how that ties into their personal sense of survival, in terms of ego, self-entitlement, self-esteem, and what all we don't know about the human brain and how personality is developed, I will not get into here. But people have been killed over the right pair of shoes. That is quite revealing, isn't it? So, people get killed because they can do things, which others cannot. They can go to a dance because they have the right pair of shoes, and you don't, so you go ahead and kill them. That's exactly my point. Omnipotence and sadism are two sides of the same medal. Maybe BDSM would help.

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 9:10:40 AM)
That's what you took from my post? People get killed b/c they can do things which others cannot? How does that translate exactly? That some will kill for a pair of shoes means this in a philosophical sense: some will kill for a pair of shoes. That is a psychological and sociological issues, not a philosophical one. For a self proclaimed intellectual, you don't exactly do very well when challenged, do you? I so look forward to your continued responses. When are you going to respond to Kana and LordOdin? They took your original post seriously and wrote insightful and measured responses. Don't they deserve a reply?

Intellectual -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 10:36:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kana Dude-you need to read Lord of the Flies. Since you like philosophy, how bout going back to an original, Hobbes. He famously postulated that life w/o civilization, as in the original primal nature state is solitary, lonely, nasty, brutish and short. In this state, everyone is entitled to anything and everything in the world. This in turn leads to bellum omnium contra omnes, an eternal war of all against all for survival (The modern version of this of course is Anne Rice's depiction of the world as the savage garden) In this world there can never be peace, so there can never be industry, trade, culture, arts or agriculture. Thus, in order to live life, man surrenders some of his initial rights to everything and anything-thus the social contract is formed. Well, I frankly admit that I'm not familiar with Hobbes. But from the way you are describing his theory, I'm not convinced. Life was never solitary and lonely. Apes hunt in packs, and so did the first humans. There is even evidence that the first humans performed primitive surgery on one another. If life was brutish and short, it was due to the lack of technology, not due to the lack of social contracts. Claiming that socially more advanced civilizations are also more technologically advanced is putting the cart before the horse. When a certain group of people gains a technological edge over other groups, some members within the group will become lazy and try to sponge off the system. They might aspire to professions, which are not really necessary, like bankers, lawyers, musicians. When other groups catch up, the system collapses.

Intellectual -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 11:48:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LordOdinn Sophism isn't a philosophical school, that I'm aware of. Generally, the classical deities aren't "moral beings", just more powerful than mortals. I can see them being called immoral,though certain dieties,such as the Furies ARE personifications of moral retribution. I randomly picked sophism. If you don't like it, pick hedonism, which is similarly immoral. When I used the expression "moral being", I wasn't referring to gods but to other people who don't believe in this particular religion or philosophy and altruistically punish the believers for reasons, which they might not understand because they don't understand altruistic behaviour. quote: This one is a total non sequitur. Stoicism has absolutely nothing in common with Ghandi's non-violence. Stoicism appealed to the extremely war-like Romans as a philosophy for tough endurance of misfortune, including suicide. Seneca committed suicide to: 1) avoid turture and 2) because under Roman law his heirs couldn't inherit if he was executed. Yes, but tough endurance of misfortune and inner peace in the face of adversities is also a trademark of Hinduism, isn't it? quote: The ultra-Catholic Descartes and Buddhism??????? Explain, please. My gosh... Have you never read about Opus dei? The rumour that pope Johannes Paul I was poisoned by his own cardinals? People don't always believe in the values that they are paid to represent. quote: I can see some parallel here, though Utilitarianism is based on practical, real world application while Christianity is based on a God-given moral idea. Granted. Religions require the existence of God and philosophies don't. But they can demand the same kind of behaviour. It's simply a matter of how far people are willing to go when they demand certain moral behaviours. quote: Not even close. See above. Machiavelli is Utilitarianism writ large. I've never heard anyone EVER argue that Machiavelli argued from moral principles. He was the founder of modern political theory based on pure utility, not ethics. Ummmhhh... Machiavellianism = applied utilitarianism? I don't think so. quote: Again, the "Will to Power" and divine revelation have nothing in common at the fundamental level. Yes, but if the divine revelation demands from believers to conquer the world and spread the religion using the sword, then there is a clear association with the "will to power". quote: Not familiar enough with Schoppenhauer to comment. ... quote: Not sure what parallel you see with this duality. The pagan warrior pantheons are the antithesis of reason,exulting violence for violence's sake and Kant, who was a pacifist and a believer in the virtue of pure reason. Naahhh, the pagan warriors usually fought against technologically more advanced and more prosperous civilizations, which were not interested in sharing their wealth. If anyone ever exulted violence for violence's sake, it was the old Romans and Egyptians who sacrificed their own people on altars and in colloseums.

FrostedFlake -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 1:09:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NiceButMeanGirl quote: ORIGINAL: FrostedFlake quote: Hello all! I'm German and I've recently come to the conclusion that BDSM is ultimately inevitable, ... Yeah, uhmmm... have you ever noticed that certain nationalities TEND to view things in a certain ...odd... way. "Dominance, Control, Regimentation, BECAUSE I SAID SO...And the like." Sound familiar? You might not think so, and you don't have to, but that IS the way the history books read. Umm, you're referring to Hitler I'm sure. I'm German and don't see things that way at all. Hitler and his horrors are a total embarrassment to me. NBMG I apologize if I came across that way. I did not intend to single out Germany. I certainly would not assert that Hitler is the totality of the shortcomings the German National Zeitgeist has to contemplate. Just for openers, what was it Hitler offered Germany that was attractive enough that he became successful? How is it that he was tolerated? Hitler was not an isolated incident, did not create himself, was not responsible for his becoming Fuhrer. Sure, he led the parade, but what has to be admitted is... ...there WAS a parade. A prevalent state of mind respecting nothing so much as authority. The same parade that led to 1914. And 1870. A parade reaching deep into German history. All the way back to the Holy Roman Empire being divided between three Sons. With the weakest in the middle. Leaving the strong to divide his lands between them. Repeatedly. To be a bit clearer, Ivan the Terrible is often thought of by westerners as an iconic figure of terror. But the Russ view him as a sort of savior. Because he faced and defeated the Tatars. Who had brutalized the Russ to such a degree that their character is still marked by that to this day. The typical Russian simply and literally does not see that same World I see. We are that different because our history is that different. Remember the Cold War? Pushbutton Global Suicide. What was that all about? If not this difference I just spoke of. Another parade. And a very similar one. A prevalent mindset respecting nothing so much as authority. You can fill in the rest, I am sure. Just as quickly as you omitted it.

Kana -> RE: BDSM and philosophy (9/3/2012 1:14:52 PM)
quote: Well, I frankly admit that I'm not familiar with Hobbes. Whaaaaa? My man, how can you call yourself any sort of philosopher and not know Hobbes? That's like being a Christian and not knowing who Paul was. Hobbes is the foot planted in the center of the ring, the flag planted on the hill. He staked the center ground and all philosophers since have either been hard at work refuting his theories (Locke et al) or agreeing and showing how Hobbes is right. Rawls, Nozick, all of em are working around the ground Hobbes staked centuries ago.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.3964844