News NoFap Founder Sues Neuroscientist who says No.

[Moonbeam]

What all this has to do with porn, masturbation, libel suits, or white nationalists is beyond me. When you were pondering over knowing the answer, the first thing which came to mind was, what is the question?

I thought this thread centered around the differing opinions as to whether porn and masturbation are positive or negative activities with the corollary concern for me as to who would really know. In all and everything we consider there is this question as to whether there is an objective answer and if so how would you recognize it as such. I realize that by raising such concerns I believe I poke a hornets nest, the assumptions people make they are qualified to have an opinion. This matter is further complicated by the fact that what I call dying to the ego is the realization that I never knew all the things I thought I did such that knowing is knowing nothing as high wisdom. Unfortunately when you know you do not know people see only conceit because of the nature of sleep as a state of competition. The problem for me is that I do not care what other people think because I believe that self realization is a peek state that brings with it it's own but different certainty.

For example, I believe that porn consists of the ability to pretend another human being is an object rather than what came into the world as a beautiful innocent new born baby that in an enlightened world would have never gone down much less ever known about that road. I am not into sex with children who have been broken by life. Naturally, I also believe that free will is bull shit. We have been programmed like machines and are asleep to reality. Naturally, when you present a moral position you get called a moralist, a purist, a prude and so on and so forth, as any offended ego machine will react to any challenge.

 

[woolfe9998]

I thought this thread centered around the differing opinions as to whether porn and masturbation are positive or negative activities with the corollary concern for me as to who would really know. In all and everything we consider there is this question as to whether there is an objective answer and if so how would you recognize it as such. I realize that by raising such concerns I believe I poke a hornets nest, the assumptions people make they are qualified to have an opinion. This matter is further complicated by the fact that what I call dying to the ego is the realization that I never knew all the things I thought I did such that knowing is knowing nothing as high wisdom. Unfortunately when you know you do not know people see only conceit because of the nature of sleep as a state of competition. The problem for me is that I do not care what other people think because I believe that self realization is a peek state that brings with it it's own but different certainty.

For example, I believe that porn consists of the ability to pretend another human being is an object rather than what came into the world as a beautiful innocent new born baby that in an enlightened world would have never gone down much less ever known about that road. I am not into sex with children who have been broken by life. Naturally, I also believe that free will is bull shit. We have been programmed like machines and are asleep to reality. Naturally, when you present a moral position you get called a moralist, a purist, a prude and so on and so forth, as any offended ego machine will react to any challenge.

The answer to questions like these lies more in science than philosophy. That's just my opinion, of course. You're entitled to your own.

 

[Moonbeam]

The answer to questions like these lies more in science than philosophy. That's just my opinion, of course. You're entitled to your own.

I didn't think I was talking philosophy at all. What I was saying is science, in my opinion, especially psychology. Say you want to study porn scientifically. How are you going to ask the right scientific questions if you have no insight into yourself? How does a person know what is psychologically harmful. How do you define that? How, for example, can you tell if a person is empathetic or emotionally cold and what effect porn might have on that? Is one state better than the other? What if one state is better and you don't know it. What experiment could you do that would reveal that unknown fact to you?

 

[woolfe9998]

I didn't think I was talking philosophy at all. What I was saying is science, in my opinion, especially psychology. Say you want to study porn scientifically. How are you going to ask the right scientific questions if you have no insight into yourself? How does a person know what is psychologically harmful. How do you define that? How, for example, can you tell if a person is empathetic or emotionally cold and what effect porn might have on that? Is one state better than the other? What if one state is better and you don't know it. What experiment could you do that would reveal that unknown fact to you?

They have testing and trained psychologists to make assessments. It's inexact, but it isn't just flying by the seat of your pants.

Also, I think the question being addressed here is a fairly narrow one: is masturbation and/or porn "addictive?" They can assess, for example, whether one experiences withdrawal symptoms during cessation, just like with known addictive agents like opiates.

As to what its long term consequences are in terms of a person's psychology, I would agree that is harder to assess, but even there it isn't impossible. Do people who masturbate a lot have stable marriages? Are they in and out of jail? Are they more likely to be violent towards women? You correlate a variable like porn with observable behaviors.

 

[Moonbeam]

They have testing and trained psychologists to make assessments. It's inexact, but it isn't just flying by the seat of your pants.

Also, I think the question being addressed here is a fairly narrow one: is masturbation and/or porn "addictive?" They can assess, for example, whether one experiences withdrawal symptoms during cessation, just like with known addictive agents like opiates.

As to what its long term consequences are in terms of a person's psychology, I would agree that is harder to assess, but even there it isn't impossible. Do people who masturbate a lot have stable marriages? Are they in and out of jail? Are they more likely to be violent towards women? You correlate a variable like porn with observable behaviors.

Yes, the observable behaviors you believe you observe. The whole reason for arguing that humanity is asleep is that we may actually be unconscious of what we are blind about. That is why I raise the other question about whether there is, let's say, an awakening that changes everything. Psychology is the study of humanity asleep. Real psychologists, if they exist, would of necessity be invisible. The assumption this is a question that is a non-question is what I call arrogance that leads to belief in oneself in the wrong way.

 

[Bitek]

For example, I believe that porn consists of the ability to pretend another human being is an object rather than what came into the world as a beautiful innocent new born baby that in an enlightened world would have never gone down much less ever known about that road. I am not into sex with children who have been broken by life. Naturally, I also believe that free will is bull shit. We have been programmed like machines and are asleep to reality. Naturally, when you present a moral position you get called a moralist, a purist, a prude and so on and so forth, as any offended ego machine will react to any challenge.

I think that's a very negative interpretation you are taking.

In the other direction, it could be said it's a falling in love fantasy by many, evidenced by how many porn stars report love letters and marriage proposals from fans.

Sure it's not based on knowing the real person, but it's not out of a place of mal-intent.

Neither can it be said all porn stars are there because they are exploited and need to be saved from the lecherous mob.

Those things can absolutely happen, altho probably much more frequently in actual prostitution, but many women are there because they want to be. The internet is providing new platforms and new ways to make their own careers of it.

Here's a recent story of a 42yo b-list Hollywood actress who moved into porn because she wanted to:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/maitland-wards-journey-from-boy-meets-world-to-porns-a-list

So perhaps it's not about taking an absolutist's view of the porn industry, but rather a "fair trade" approach. Responsibly sourced boobies if you will.

 

[whm1974]

Yes, the observable behaviors you believe you observe. The whole reason for arguing that humanity is asleep is that we may actually be unconscious of what we are blind about. That is why I raise the other question about whether there is, let's say, an awakening that changes everything. Psychology is the study of humanity asleep. Real psychologists, if they exist, would of necessity be invisible. The assumption this is a question that is a non-question is what I call arrogance that leads to belief in oneself in the wrong way.

Moonbeam, when are you going to post anything that makes sense instead of crap that is totally nonsensical? woolfe9998 has this right. Everything in the Real World is testable.

 

[1prophet]

For example, I believe that porn consists of the ability to pretend another human being is an object rather than what came into the world as a beautiful innocent new born baby that in an enlightened world would have never gone down much less ever known about that road. I am not into sex with children who have been broken by life. Naturally, I also believe that free will is bull shit. We have been programmed like machines and are asleep to reality. Naturally, when you present a moral position you get called a moralist, a purist, a prude and so on and so forth, as any offended ego machine will react to any challenge.

Without free will the devil, the snake, the short dress, the alcohol etc. made me do it becomes a just defense.

And that is precisely the reason men especially the religious ones like to use to blame women for their sexuality and keep them totally or partially covered up under the guise of culture or morality because they somehow lack the free will to control themselves.

 

[Moonbeam]

They have testing and trained psychologists to make assessments. It's inexact, but it isn't just flying by the seat of your pants.

Also, I think the question being addressed here is a fairly narrow one: is masturbation and/or porn "addictive?" They can assess, for example, whether one experiences withdrawal symptoms during cessation, just like with known addictive agents like opiates.

As to what its long term consequences are in terms of a person's psychology, I would agree that is harder to assess, but even there it isn't impossible. Do people who masturbate a lot have stable marriages? Are they in and out of jail? Are they more likely to be violent towards women? You correlate a variable like porn with observable behaviors.

This is what I mEAN

I think that's a very negative interpretation you are taking.

In the other direction, it could be said it's a falling in love fantasy by many, evidenced by how many porn stars report love letters and marriage proposals from fans.

Sure it's not based on knowing the real person, but it's not out of a place of mal-intent.

Neither can it be said all porn stars are there because they are exploited and need to be saved from the lecherous mob.

Those things can absolutely happen, altho probably much more frequently in actual prostitution, but many women are there because they want to be. The internet is providing new platforms and new ways to make their own careers of it.

Here's a recent story of a 42yo b-list Hollywood actress who moved into porn because she wanted to:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/maitland-wards-journey-from-boy-meets-world-to-porns-a-list

So perhaps it's not about taking an absolutist's view of the porn industry, but rather a "fair trade" approach. Responsibly sourced boobies if you will.

I am fully aware of the ways porn is justified in the minds of those who see nothing wrong with it. Trying to change the minds of people who feel that way would be like getting conservatives to see there is something radically wrong with their views on the real meaning of religion, in my opinion. I have had debates on this many many times before. I know what the reaction to my point of view is. My opinion is that I see what most people do not see, don't want to see, and will not therefore see. I have stepped on a liberal sacred cow and my point of view will be twisted by those who disagree to consist of some sort of religiously based prudishness toward sex. People hate themselves and any time you challenge any of their thinking or ideas they instantly become threatened, but they will never see it that way because part of the idiocy of our egotistical blindness is that being threatened is a state no egotist will admit to. It would be like admitting a flaw. The problem you have, in my opinion, is that you call my point of view negative because you are not aware of just how sick we humans actually are.

I speak from a point of view which I believe is completely shielded from view and, of course, to people like whm none of it can possibly make any sense. People who are threatened always make threats. But what about the compassion those who can see might feel for the blind. Should I offer them nothing? You can't get through life with an ego without being offended.

 

[Moonbeam]

Without free will the devil, the snake, the short dress, the alcohol etc. made me do it becomes a just defense.

And that is precisely the reason men especially the religious ones like to use to blame women for their sexuality and keep them totally or partially covered up under the guise of culture or morality because they somehow lack the free will to control themselves.

So true, and how 'free willers' get to blame all these weak willed others for all their sins. You are the opposite side of the same coin, trapped in the delusion of duality at war with an enemy that is the product of your imagination. There is no good and evil. There is only perfection in a state of oneness of being. That realization changes everything and turns the world inside out and from up side down to right side up.

 

[Ajay]

The answer to questions like these lies more in science than philosophy. That's just my opinion, of course. You're entitled to your own.

'Science', that is the application of the scientific method, is a philosophy. it is a way of thinking that drives a way of acting. I don’t know why intelligent people misunderstand this fact. I studied physics at University, maybe liberal arts students aren’t taught this?

 

[whm1974]

'Science', that is the application of the scientific method, is a philosophy. it is a way of thinking that drives a way of acting. I don’t know why intelligent people misunderstand this fact. I studied physics at University, maybe liberal arts students aren’t taught this?

Every time I hear the phase Liberal Arts I keep thinking Basket Weaving or "Do you want fries with that?" Why can't College Students chose degrees that are STEM based since the US is really in desperate need of people with STEM Degrees?

 

[woolfe9998]

'Science', that is the application of the scientific method, is a philosophy. it is a way of thinking that drives a way of acting. I don’t know why intelligent people misunderstand this fact. I studied physics at University, maybe liberal arts students aren’t taught this?

I think you're hair splitting with me over semantics. Science was a branch of philosophy or actually, everything was, in classical education. But the poster I was replying to knows the difference between a modern philosophy class and a modern science class, I'm sure. How about this: the scientific method, not some a priori meditations on human nature, is the proper way to discover truth here. Does that meet your approval?

 

[Ajay]

Yes, very well stated. I’m a bit cranky because of a migraine, so apologies for being picky.

 

[Moonbeam]

I think you're hair splitting with me over semantics. Science was a branch of philosophy or actually, everything was, in classical education. But the poster I was replying to knows the difference between a modern philosophy class and a modern science class, I'm sure. How about this: the scientific method, not some a priori meditations on human nature, is the proper way to discover truth here. Does that meet your approval?

For me personally, no. Einstein didn't discover the theory of relativity based on experimentation. The proof if the validity of his hypothesis was revealed that way. But the theory itself was the result of a deep flash of intuition, a sudden escape from a traditional way of thinking that amounted to a mental prison. There was no way to explain reality data that was coming in within that prison. Similar escapes from the prison of duality and the suffering that is it's inevitable result have been made by 'mystics' for centuries the collective study of which leads to certain patterns which in the West at this time I often refer to as ego death. These insights are referenced in religion, myth, and various mystical traditions and now in neuroscience labs.

In any case, the study of psychology in the West in my opinion is a collection of observations on people who are sick by people who are also sick, sick in the sense of being prisoners of the illusion created by dualistic thinking, the invisible prison.

 

[woolfe9998]

For me personally, no. Einstein didn't discover the theory of relativity based on experimentation. The proof if the validity of his hypothesis was revealed that way. But the theory itself was the result of a deep flash of intuition, a sudden escape from a traditional way of thinking that amounted to a mental prison. There was no way to explain reality data that was coming in within that prison. Similar escapes from the prison of duality and the suffering that is it's inevitable result have been made by 'mystics' for centuries the collective study of which leads to certain patterns which in the West at this time I often refer to as ego death. These insights are referenced in religion, myth, and various mystical traditions and now in neuroscience labs.

What you're describing is the scientific method. In physics, they have theoreticians, of which Einstein was one, who formulate hypotheses. The hypothesis is then tested. General relativity would not be recognized as a valid scientific theory without repeated experimental verification.

Empiricism is indispensable to science.

In any case, the study of psychology in the West in my opinion is a collection of observations on people who are sick by people who are also sick, sick in the sense of being prisoners of the illusion created by dualistic thinking, the invisible prison.

Then you're going to have to come up with a concrete solution. I think the problem with psychology is it is an inherently less exact science than physical science because it's harder to understand and predict human behavior than it is to, say, predict the motion of a given mass in a closed system. The problem isn't that psychologists are asleep. It's that what they're investigating is inherently difficult to access because humans aren't open books the way inanimate objects are.

 

[Bitek]

This is what I mEAN

I am fully aware of the ways porn is justified in the minds of those who see nothing wrong with it. Trying to change the minds of people who feel that way would be like getting conservatives to see there is something radically wrong with their views on the real meaning of religion, in my opinion. I have had debates on this many many times before. I know what the reaction to my point of view is. My opinion is that I see what most people do not see, don't want to see, and will not therefore see. I have stepped on a liberal sacred cow and my point of view will be twisted by those who disagree to consist of some sort of religiously based prudishness toward sex. People hate themselves and any time you challenge any of their thinking or ideas they instantly become threatened, but they will never see it that way because part of the idiocy of our egotistical blindness is that being threatened is a state no egotist will admit to. It would be like admitting a flaw. The problem you have, in my opinion, is that you call my point of view negative because you are not aware of just how sick we humans actually are.

I speak from a point of view which I believe is completely shielded from view and, of course, to people like whm none of it can possibly make any sense. People who are threatened always make threats. But what about the compassion those who can see might feel for the blind. Should I offer them nothing? You can't get through life with an ego without being offended.

Using such a broad brush isn't intellectually challenging, it's a shortcut.

The real challenge is to understand and appreciate the nuances of the issue.

I don't think you or I have any right to pass judgement on free-willed adults engaging in activity of their own choosing with other freely participating adults. I don't think a woman such as Maitland in the story I linked needs judges or white knights.

Are there other areas of the industry where vulnerable people are exploited? Obviously yes. But just tossing them all into the same pot and then shower them with pity and condemnation doesn't accomplish anything other than reveal insights into the mind and motivations of the accuser.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Every time I hear the phase Liberal Arts I keep thinking Basket Weaving or "Do you want fries with that?" Why can't College Students chose degrees that are STEM based since the US is really in desperate need of people with STEM Degrees?

Yeah, every one should be a scientist.

You apparently have little understanding of the "Liberal Arts" or their place/importance in human society.

You also apparently have no idea as to what American students are actually studying either.

Fast Facts: Most common undergraduate fields of study (37)

The NCES Fast Facts Tool provides quick answers to many education questions (National Center for Education Statistics). Get answers on Early Childhood Education, Elementary and Secondary Education and Higher Education here.

nces.ed.gov

Oddly enough, it seems that there is very little demand for basket weaving degrees.

 

[Moonbeam]

woolfe9998:
What you're describing is the scientific method. In physics, they have theoreticians, of which Einstein was one, who formulate hypotheses. The hypothesis is then tested. General relativity would not be recognized as a valid scientific theory without repeated experimental verification.

Empiricism is indispensable to science.

Of course and true enough. But the scientific method is not what produces the ah ha moment of intuition. It supplies some of the matrix in which inspiration takes place. The point being that it is similar to mystical awakening. It is the product of connection that are make in the mind that were previously unsuspected but perhaps felt at some difficult to access level. Some kind of shock, random input, chance happening, daydreaming, painful suffering, deep curiosity, hunger or love seems to drive it.

w: Then you're going to have to come up with a concrete solution. I think the problem with psychology is it is an inherently less exact science than physical science because it's harder to understand and predict human behavior than it is to, say, predict the motion of a given mass in a closed system. The problem isn't that psychologists are asleep. It's that what they're investigating is inherently difficult to access because humans aren't open books the way inanimate objects are.

M: All quite true also but even without the extra problem of sleep. The only stake I have in this is that because I believe that humanity is asleep, I feel it would be better to be awake. So, if we do sleep, not knowing it or believing we are awake will work against awakening. I just want to alert those who may be open to the idea to that possibility. I'm all for believing in yourself but not prematurely when ones real condition is ignorance. The problem though is that there is that sleeping side of us that feels insulted by the very notion we could have some issues. Catch 22

 

[woolfe9998]

woolfe9998:
What you're describing is the scientific method. In physics, they have theoreticians, of which Einstein was one, who formulate hypotheses. The hypothesis is then tested. General relativity would not be recognized as a valid scientific theory without repeated experimental verification.

Empiricism is indispensable to science.

Of course and true enough. But the scientific method is not what produces the ah ha moment of intuition. It supplies some of the matrix in which inspiration takes place. The point being that it is similar to mystical awakening. It is the product of connection that are make in the mind that were previously unsuspected but perhaps felt at some difficult to access level. Some kind of shock, random input, chance happening, daydreaming, painful suffering, deep curiosity, hunger or love seems to drive it.

There's no doubt that Einstein was a creative thinker. It seemed perfectly logical for Newton to assume that gravity was an attractive force exerted by bodies with mass on other bodies with mass. How Einstein figured out that there's invisible stuff - i.e. spacetime - surrounding everything and that this stuff reconfigures itself around bodies of mass in a way that affects the motion of other bodies of mass is beyond me. It blows my mind that he thought of that - and the thing itself blows my mind.

But I'm not sure either of us really knows what causes certain people to think outside the box while the rest of us can go through our entire lives without an unconventional thought which is at the same time, also a rational and logical thought. His thought process was creative but also logical because it made sense of existing anomalies in our knowledge of planetary motion, things which could not be explained by Newton.

So we really don't know why some people have this capability, but I suspect that it's something physical in the brain.

w: Then you're going to have to come up with a concrete solution. I think the problem with psychology is it is an inherently less exact science than physical science because it's harder to understand and predict human behavior than it is to, say, predict the motion of a given mass in a closed system. The problem isn't that psychologists are asleep. It's that what they're investigating is inherently difficult to access because humans aren't open books the way inanimate objects are.

M: All quite true also but even without the extra problem of sleep. The only stake I have in this is that because I believe that humanity is asleep, I feel it would be better to be awake. So, if we do sleep, not knowing it or believing we are awake will work against awakening. I just want to alert those who may be open to the idea to that possibility. I'm all for believing in yourself but not prematurely when ones real condition is ignorance. The problem though is that there is that sleeping side of us that feels insulted by the very notion we could have some issues. Catch 22

Good luck in your quest for human wokeness. We're just about on the brink of doom right now so you'd better get busy.

 

[Moonbeam]

Using such a broad brush isn't intellectually challenging, it's a shortcut.

The real challenge is to understand and appreciate the nuances of the issue.

I don't think you or I have any right to pass judgement on free-willed adults engaging in activity of their own choosing with other freely participating adults. I don't think a woman such as Maitland in the story I linked needs judges or white knights.

Are there other areas of the industry where vulnerable people are exploited? Obviously yes. But just tossing them all into the same pot and then shower them with pity and condemnation doesn't accomplish anything other than reveal insights into the mind and motivations of the accuser.

I can't change the fact that you can't see I am not nor can be judgmental. Humanity is asleep. Nobody can be blamed for anything. It is you who hears blame when it is suggested to you that you can't be blamed for being asleep because it feels insulting to your ego. What? Me asleep? Nonsense. I didn't learn these things cheap. I was crushed out of existence. I have known hopelessness and expected I would never be happy again.

 

[whm1974]

I can't change the fact that you can't see I am not nor can be judgmental. Humanity is asleep. Nobody can be blamed for anything. It is you who hears blame when it is suggested to you that you can't be blamed for being asleep because it feels insulting to your ego. What? Me asleep? Nonsense. I didn't learn these things cheap. I was crushed out of existence. I have known hopelessness and expected I would never be happy again.

What the Hell do you mean by Nobody can be blamed for anything? Actually yes they can. If someone engages in harmful behavior that hurts other people, then yes they can blamed.

You are sprouting utter nonsense again for no good reason.

 

[JEDIYoda]

to be or not to be...

 

[Moonbeam]

What the Hell do you mean by Nobody can be blamed for anything? Actually yes they can. If someone engages in harmful behavior that hurts other people, then yes they can blamed.

You are sprouting utter nonsense again for no good reason.

What the Hell do you mean by Nobody can be blamed for anything? Actually yes they can. If someone engages in harmful behavior that hurts other people, then yes they can blamed.

You are sprouting utter nonsense again for no good reason.

Perhaps you are confusing the fact that one can blame anybody for anything with the fact that as sleeping or programmed machines the notion one is justified in blaming anybody for anything is preposterous. That would sort of being like a drunk in a drunken stupor blaming another drunk in a drunken stupor for being drunk. I am aware, of course, that your worldview is built on blame and having it challenged leaves you kind of naked and out in the rain. You have the option to believe as you wish or experience some growing pains.

 

[Atreus21]

Porn is destructive and deadening and weak and degrading and we all know it. that men are making some effort to control their impulses is something women would rightly applaud in a sane world.