The Art of Vice

originally posted by: Nechash
a reply to: ImaFungi

You're going to have to give me some time to let that process. That was a foundation stone. I can definitely say you've fixed my eyes on something I've never considered before. I could accept temperance as a virtue. The Romans did, who am I to say they were wrong.

I just came across this, trying to look up a bit about what you mentioned, as even OP mentions similar such things;

www2.potsdam.edu...

A point I was trying to make, that you also originally made, was that the nature of society, humanity, law itself, is the sacrificing of ultimate freedom (to rape, steal, kill) for the greater good, of the individual and therefore the whole.

Another point I was trying to make, was that a person who is addicted to their vice (I am not saying this out of thin air as I believe it is quite well known of such things as counseling and substance abuse clinics and programs), maybe not necessarily desire to abuse their vice as they do, but have 'lost' some control over themselves. This power of temptation, and without research, what I suspect the relation of the term 'vice' being about (a tight, trap, being held, grip) is that the power of the animal temptations, of the body, can be degrading to the person, even to the extent of the person wishes they were not in such a vice, but no longer has the power, or freedom, to abandon their addiction.

It is a very interesting topic regardless. In no way am I suggesting the ideal world would be a state of perfect robot prudes. But it is something to consider, what the nature of most ideal human societal state would be, and the nature of such physical and intellectual and emotional pleasures, and the desire for carnal pleasure that may at times be irrational in the overall scheme of things. The thing is, if a person could take heroin 100000 times in their life with guaranteed no physical side effects, but all the pleasure associated, would there be any reason not to do it? And thus, we have such things as our cultural entertainments, the minor accepted damage of alcohol, sex being a hot commodity, etc.

a reply to: Nechash

And I could never strip someone of their independence permanently. For me, that is equivalent to murder.

And yet we have allowed the pseudo science of psychiatry the power to incarcerate all who society finds outside the norm.
It allows us to wash our hands of the matter and feel humane. After all they have a university degree.

Great OP by the way

a reply to: ImaFungi

The way I have viewed this in the past is that we do not have the right to rape, murder or enslave someone else, not because we've agreed to give up that liberty, but because we never had it in the first place. We have no claim to their life, person or property. Viewing it from terms of power definitely changes the argument slightly, but you've got to be careful with the implications of any axioms that you accept as true. The slightest flaw in logic can lead to devastatingly bad conclusions. When it comes to extant systems of logic, I generally reverse engineer the system, looking at their outcomes and working my way backwards. Ultimately it is purely humanistic intuition that has the final say in my world-view. If something injures people and diminishes their life, it is unjustifiable. You've attacked this argument from a very good angle with me. Going after first principles and outcomes are my two axial points, so kudos for that. Ten years ago, you could have talked me into anything with that methodology.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

They leave victimized people to be locked in among psychopaths and to be preyed upon by institutions like Alcoholics Anonymous and Big Pharma. Coupled with that fact, many of the people who work in those centers become tyrannic in their treatment of patients and the solution they arrive at is just to medicate these people into oblivion. It is an insane situation we've got going on there.

a reply to: Nechash

You must separate the two freedoms. Freedom of Human law. And freedom of natural physical potential law.

The latter dictates it is possible for a human to murder a human. That is a degree of freedom accessible.

Humans collectively sacrifice the temptation of their ability to murder each other, because living in a society where people do not murder people, is better than living in a society in which people have the freedom to murder one another (or at least so they say).

a reply to: ImaFungi

So they say? Unless we are talking about a Vehmic court in a time of universal corruption, I can't think of any time where murder is a good thing. You're not trying to revive Sparta are you? Are you an assassin? They were crafty too. ;p

Bravo! I really enjoyed that. I can especially resonate with #4 - the one willing to take on the unknown, explore the dark will either be destroyed or become an artist of some kind. We wrestle with spirits and powers and harness them to ourselves. To live without fear is to feel like a God, or perhaps as close to one as we humans can ever be.

The silencing of our animal natures is the original aberration, the first mutation from which all social behaviors and constructs evolved. At what point have we killed that natural being that animal who is at all times connected to the natural world?

a reply to: Nechash

It is an insane situation we've got going on there.

hehe
And therein lies the irony, medication as a form of behavioural control because your ideas are non-conformist

originally posted by: Nechash
So long as the expressed dynamic satisfies the individual standards of the voluntary and consensual participants in a non threatening way and non permanent way.

That sounds nice when written but has a lot of fragility in practice and when push comes to shove. Especially when coming into contact with relatively isolated states of existence.

originally posted by: Nechash
I'm uncomfortable with slavery of any kind...

What about when the person truly prefers to be under the authority of another?

originally posted by: Nechash
...but let's say people ... found a video game designer who could send them into a virtual world forever and they chose to do this knowingly, then who am I to intervene?

Indeed. It's a terrifying prospect to have a sense of "cosmic oneness" while at that same time allowing "someone" to venture into a journey where it's very possible they will "never" return.

originally posted by: Nechash
I'd request the designer include a release button inside the game so people could find their own way out if they changed their mind later on, but how can you parent people to that level?

And what if people went in specifically requesting to not be allowed access to such an easy exit because they know they would take it rather than be forced to develop?

originally posted by: Nechash
If I were to strip someone of their liberty, I'd have to be absolutely certain that it was truly in their best interest beyond any doubt.

The only people who are concerned about stripping people of liberty are people who already fundamentally comprehend liberty. The only person I would trust with stripping me of liberty is someone who already understands. I go into a haunted house trusting the person running it knows that nobody wants to be physically accosted... but they do want to feel as close as possible to it.

originally posted by: Nechash
I could never do that to someone just because of my own personal preferences. And I could never strip someone of their independence permanently. For me, that is equivalent to murder.

Maybe. I dunno. People have some pretty far out preferences and I'm going to be honest when I state that my standards would be the equivalent of murder if applied even with the best of intentions. Which is why I don't seek to apply them... much as I perceive you ultimately don't desire to apply yours.

Your writing is always enjoyable in form!

Your view of the subject is interesting.

I have a slightly different way of looking at and living with vices and impulses of the most basic animal nature..... which is that suppression of these has a certain value to it. It has a usage. BUT.... within a process that includes a moment of release too.

Meaning, I find that suppression of these impulsions is a way of saving up energy. Though if repressed for too long a time they become stagnant, putrid, and perverted (as in the case of taboos, which give rise to subversive destructive behaviors) if consciously unlocked at intervals, they give out an abundance of energy that can be experienced as propulsion of joy.

Our fears, for example, restrain these impulses and urges- so in overcoming fears, we experience a rush of positive energy and self confidence which can carry on into other areas of our life and projects.

My husband was afraid of flying in smaller planes when we met (we had to turn down a wedding gift of a plane ride up the California coast and night in a fancy hotel because of his fear).
When he got to a period in his career where he was stagnating, not enjoying himself, and feeling unsatisfied with his income, but also terribly afraid of taking the risk of changing, something broke that state...


I worked for three years, full time, to save up enough money to buy him a flight on a fighter jet. I offered this to him on his birthday. In his mind this was such a huge opportunity he could not refuse it. He had the time of his life, and watches the video of it often, and swears it was the most wonderful thing he has ever done.

I don't think it is just coincidence that it was just after that he took the risk to leave his job and set out on a new one that is more interesting and pays better (and has turned out to be a very good decision). The transgression of the limits he had set upon himself gave him a rush of joy and confidence.

Our fears are like invisible barriers we set for ourself, like a dam, and when we open the floodgates, we can coast on that power.

He did something similar for me when he gave me the gift of a young horse one day. I was afraid of dealing with it, and had a specific fear of galloping, but felt such an opportunity could not be refused! That experience set me to face a whole lotta fears, and overcome them, and my confidence and joy in life then shot through the roof! I felt if I could overcome those fears, the others just seem minor obstacles in comparision.

I see the cultural taboos as the same sorts of fears- your culture could tell you that certain acts are evil, bound to ruin your soul and drown your conscious will, so you become afraid to let them manifest freely. They form those dams of energy.

If nothing else, I could say that my life has been made up of looking for those dams to open up. Breaching fears and taboos, and stepping out into unknown territories.... which is exhilerating, and could not be done if those limits and walls weren't there in the first place!

I guess, what I am trying to say is that - our rules are made to be broken from time to time.

originally posted by: Bluesma
I guess, what I am trying to say is that - our rules are made to be broken from time to time.

Therefore rules are actually amplifiers.

When in talented hands of course.

a reply to: ImaFungi

My conclusion is that the extirpation of the so-called sinful impulses (for instance the Christian vices, greed, lust, envy, pride etc.), or in other words, the suppression of preconceived, but completely misunderstood, sets of certain human tendencies by way of silencing, denying, shaming, and associating them with pain, evil, and other forms of demonology for thousands and thousands of years, suppressing the potential to learn and to understand how to best use these impulses in favor of destroying them outright, results in a hate for the world. Without the outlet, without some form of release, and the pleasure that comes with it, it becomes a disease.

This hate is apparent in John, for instance, where men tell us we shall not love the world, based on the sole principle that the desires of the flesh, the pride of life, are evil. This principle is based not on any logical or reasonable argument—for they give none—but based entirely on a morality conceived by slaves. As slaves, morality is delivered by divine order, not reason. Rather than strike back at our masters, we turn the other cheek so that they can hit us twice, and so on. And it is as slaves they shall be told how to control themselves.

I agree with you that there is value in restraint in regards to abusing vices. No longer being masters over our passions makes us slaves to them. This is why the moralities written on tablets are required: some are simply to weak to accept that responsibility. This might sounds cruel, but I happen to see weakness as a valuable evolutionary trait when it comes to humans. But like we shall not extirpate the vices, we shall also not extirpate the virtues.

I do not believe in free or unfree wills. The amount of influences upon us, and our ability to influence back, negates the possibility of there being any such extremes. There are strong and weak wills. There is self-imposed victory and defeat in willing.

But I metaphorically mentioned that we have a pantheon of gods imprisoned within us. I am speaking pluralistically about one complex biological organism. Of course, virtues and vices, tendencies, urges, impulses, are purely metaphorical, purely subjective, and so is the way we differentiate between one impulse over another within ourselves. This hierarchy of urges, desires, etc. is not unlike pantheons of gods—it doesn’t exist. There are no virtues and vices as such. They are artifacts of culture, like “free will” and sin. They are writing on tablets. What we do have is the hierarchy we subjectively infer within ourselves, the differentiating between this and that feeling and this and that thought, as if we were separate from them. Only if one can “become Zeus” in this subjective sense, can one master these urges, or rather, become them, become what he is and act accordingly.

Other people are not privy to this inner-mythology, to whether we are slaves or master to ourselves. What they are privy to is the organism and what it is doing. They are privy to the art-form culminating into a masterwork, into a life. It is in this vein that morality is aesthetics. In the end, morality is a matter of taste.

a reply to: Bluesma

Well put. I would agree that taboo has built many metaphorical hurdles. I've often felt shame for some of my actions, even though nothing other than myself was affected by them, simply because of cultural taboo. Yes, they wouldn't be rules if they were never broken.

Fear to me is a great source of wisdom. Every urge isn't forcing us to do anything, but they are no less telling us something. If we learn to speak their language, their message can be heeded.

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: ImaFungi

My conclusion is that the extirpation of the so-called sinful impulses (for instance the Christian vices, greed, lust, envy, pride etc.), or in other words, the suppression of preconceived, but completely misunderstood, sets of certain human tendencies by way of silencing, denying, shaming, and associating them with pain, evil, and other forms of demonology for thousands and thousands of years, suppressing the potential to learn and to understand how to best use these impulses in favor of destroying them outright, results in a hate for the world. Without the outlet, without some form of release, and the pleasure that comes with it, it becomes a disease.

Oh, I think for a lot of these natural impulses, they are suppressed, so that they can make available to the masters an amplified (thanks for the terminology help, to the last poster) amount of energy for their own means.

Like, in the suppression of mens natural urges to be aggressive, a huge force grows inside a man, that can be effectively tapped through military actions. As it grows stronger inside, the need for expression grows, and then the masters offer an outlet that is acceptable to them- here, join this, and you can be aggressive!

That energy is channelled into their projects and goals.

Why do people choose to remain in a slave mentality? (because I think we choose, if even on a subconscious level- if we are doing it, there is a reason).

I find that self empowerment (being that "Zeus" that can direct the power of these internal "gods") is often rejected for two reasons-

Lack of intents and goals. They turn to someone or something else because they just haven't much idea what they would like to do with this energy. I think we have a natural repulsion to wasting energy, as it is generally counter to our drives for survival.

Lack of confidence in our ability to be handle responsibility. More power means responsibility.
In people who are highly sensitive and empathic, in particular, responsibility includes the channeling of energy into intents which are constructive, but ALSO do not harm others.

This confidence is something that grows with experience, and knowledge of how this world works. If someone takes on too much power all of a sudden (without a progressive process of adaptation) then it is likely they will be clumsy with it, and hurt themselves or others. (the subconscious is not that good at distinguishing the two anyways).

So we give our power to someone else, and trust them to be more experienced and skilled in directing it (us).

A clear reflection of this can be seen in peoples attitudes about money- most people will say they observe that someone who suddenly becomes very very rich too quickly is often drawn into self destructive behaviors. So although they say they want to be very very rich, they also have repulsions to it inside which limit them. (and in the meantime, they support and give money to someone else.... )

I am not saying slave mentality is 'good" nor that it is "bad" that is for each one to judge for themselves. I simply have interest in "why things are as they are"- what the mechanisms behind them are.

a reply to: Aphorism

Think of evolution and incarnation, supposedly we have evolved from primates, and naturally reached maturation as humans. Doesn't this mean that we have seen and experienced it all? We have been animals, we have been primitive, we have experienced untold pains and suffering. Nobody would be perfect in this light, we have all inevitably done bad things and experienced bad things.

Why do we repress the primitive sides of our natures - we should joke about it, as we know, that we are mature and in control of ourselves.

originally posted by: Bluesma
(thanks for the terminology help, to the last poster)

Please don't feed the troll.

originally posted by: Aphorism
I've often felt shame for some of my actions, even though nothing other than myself was affected by them, simply because of cultural taboo.

Despite my best efforts, I always wind up as me.

originally posted by: Aphorism
Every urge isn't forcing us to do anything, but they are no less telling us something.

Look both ways before crossing the streams.

Looking back at my childhood fears, specifically the nightmares which plagued me when young become the very things I found most interesting later in life. I had a mortal fear of snakes and insects which turned to love and respect once I began to know them better. Life is about conquering our fears in so many ways, the things I still fear are the source of anxiety today. I still have much growing to do.

The greatest fear I believe is still mastery of self, the ability to control our physical urges. Primitive (so-called) societies gave people the opportunity through various rituals to face them and use that power to enhance our being. Modern society gives us little in that way, joining the Army and facing combat is one of few methods left for young men to transition into adults. But for those not inclined to be warriors what rituals remain to become men?

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
The greatest fear I believe is still mastery of self, the ability to control our physical urges.

I'm not afraid of my Greek gods, I'm afraid of people who are afraid of *their* Greek gods.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
Primitive (so-called) societies gave people the opportunity through various rituals to face them and use that power to enhance our being. Modern society gives us little in that way...

I don't come across many English speaking people who have noticed this. I agree, the mechanized method of life stage transition we currently use is highly destructive. Though it would be incredibly difficult to implement in the current environment... a social and public ritual to determine a person's public drinking age would be far more effective than a one size fits all number.

The mechanization of ritual has removed all responsibility from the elder class to be honest with the junior class and it's killing us.

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
But for those not inclined to be warriors what rituals remain to become men?

Learning to hide out in a man child costume?

The lessons learned from Virtues should be learned from the vices of one self or others.

If ones lusts to much, they'd probably catch something, or get beaten by the oaf of a husband.
If one too glutinous, they gain weight and health problems.
If ones too envious, they will never learn to love.
If ones is too greedy, they will never be satisfied.
If ones a sloth, well they won't do much.(Could be a virtue in way, since its action kind of relate to patience's, although albeit lazy)
If ones too proud, the greater the fall, Lucifer story was based on pride since he won't bow to humans.
If ones to wrathful, one could blow a blood vessel, or just get sloppy.

Sadly, much of the main religions of today do no such thing helping one deal how should we say, addictions. They don't teach patience, they teach promises after death. They don't teach one to learn and grow, they just idolize and put it on the pedestal to be stagnant views of life where the river becomes so narrow it chokes.

Thats why I wouldn't mind coverting to Buddhism, they enjoy learning, I just don't like cold ass mountains.