So why do we make sex such a big deal.
If practiced casually you’re labeled as a “whore” or “pimp” depending on the persons gender, which IMO is less advantageous when it comes to women.
Terms that are merely subjective and that hold no objective truth.
Why continue to deprive yourself because of other people’s judgment rather then liberate yourself self-consciously and thus, sexually.
What does the fact that we’re animals have to do with anything? Most animals have complicated rituals and behaviors relating to sex, and several of them routinely mate for life.
It has to do with the fact that sex is not some divine gift from a magical man living in the sky. Therefor why treat it as such?
The Truth Is We Are All Animals, so…
why do we make killing people a big deal?
…let’s do it like they do on the Discovery Channel.
Because most people are brought up on religious doctrine. And most still believe that morality exists objectively.
If you ask me, me killing a person is the same as a tiger killing an antelope.
But not when you believe that God/Morality exists
umm, I’m going to skip the philosophical debate over objective truths and morality for now… and cross cultural differences.
To put it simply… we make big deal about sex **because **we’re (social) animals. In nearly all animals that live in groups sex is a power thing, it defines your position in the group. The alphas choose who they allow to have sex with them. In some species with more complex interactions it’s a tool to create group cohesion, this is common in primate social behavior, think of it as extreme back-scratching.
Clear and precise, nice comment GHO57
So we make sex a big deal because we’re social animals, pretty straight forward. But doesn’t that deprive us of liberation and constrain our desire to be sexually active?
Eh, I have no religious or moral hangups specifically related to sex itself. (have a few ethical principles re’ honesty and not intentionally hurting others, though, which I see no reason to abandon, God or no God)
I think there is an argument to be made for human society having certain rules (guidlines, if you’re a pirate ;)) surrounding sex…cheating/adultery is pretty generally “bad”, lying about your sexual health and infecting others is always “bad”, rape is a huge no-no, as is child molestation. WHY? We don’t need any God to justify such rules…they are considered wrong/bad simply because they HURT people.
Same for rules frowning on killing people…absolutely no valid comparison between a wild carnivore killing an herbivore to eat and humans killing one another. Give me a break. :rolleyes:
Again, no God needed for humans to figure out that it’s generally better NOT to go around killing one another and being killed on a whim.
If you want to be sexually liberated, more power to you…but to be irresponsible, unsafe, violent or otherwise a douchebag and justify it as “we’re all animals, and right and wrong don’t exist so I can do whatever I want to whomever I want” is bullshit.
Is molesting a kid bad? Is killing someone bad? Yes…
But is bad not subjective?
Which really says what?
Why are you so concerned of others opinions? If you can find tons of willing partners, then go for your life. Just take care to avoid the unwanted consequences of STD’s and kids
Um, in so far as we are “deprived” and “constrained”, we are deprived and constrained by our own natures as social animals, aren’t we? If we weren’t so deprived and constrained, then we wouldn’t be human.
Even if we could exchange one nature for another, we would siimply be exchanging one set of constraints for another.
You tell us. You’re the one who is claiming that bad is subjective. What conclusions do you draw from that about child molestation and murder?
Quote where I said it was my objective to have a lot of sex.
Do I even want to have sex?
These are questions that can only be asked by me, which I have not done. So why act as if I have?
When you say human, in what sense to you mean? Made in the image of God human. Or extremely complex conscious animal?
Good question UDS
So you said that molesting or killing someone is “bad” because it hurts someone. Which we can all agree on that im sure. But if we are simply complex rational (social) animals, what is the difference between a lion killing a new born antelope? Is that not bad also?
Or because they’re less complex as we are, they’re exempt from the rule?
and why if we’re both animals at the end of the day?
It says that we experience things subjectively because we are animals. Self-aware animals. And we also possess the ability to empathize with others. )most of us, anyway)
If I were to kill you, would you not make a subjective judgement that the experience was “bad”? I suspect so. I don’t blame you, me too! Most would agree.
And so we generally agree among ourselves that killing each other is BAD.
Same for molesting kids or rape or stealing or being infected with an STD by a sexual partner who lied or cheated on by a trusted partner, etc…
There is a reason every religion has a version of the so-called golden rule (“do unto others as you would have them do unto you” or “Do as thou wilt as harms no-one”)…yes, good and bad, right and wrong ARE subjective and on a higher level don’t exist in any meaningful way, imo, but HERE, on this human level, they DO.
I completely agree that subjective value judgements like “whore” (I think “slut” and “player” might be better terms for what it seems you were aiming for…since whore and pimp signify objective activities) are social value judgements with highly variable worth.
But then you went on to elaborate about muder and child molestation and those activities are, imo, in a very different realm. They are not victimless crimes or prudish social slurs directed at otherwise benign sexually liberated individuals.
That was more so the point of this thread, “On a higher level they don’t exist in any meaningful way”.
You’re right, on this human level they do.
But do they exist on this human earth because of consequence? And if none, would they exist at all?
Yes. But then again, it’s a trade-off. In order to reap the benefits of being a part of a society, we have to comply to the restrictions it poses on our behavior. There’s always the possibility of choosing to belong to a subculture that expresses different norms; in the case of sexual liberation…swingers, bdsm-scene… or some sort of a free love commune, or less conservative parts of Europe :D. Interactions within those subcultures follow different rules, on the flip-side, they don’t offer the same benefits society at large does.
Take the killing thing for an example; you could join a gang, then killing wouldn’t be so frowned upon, you could even be socially rewarded for it… but their dental plan sucks. Same thing can be seen in nature… a troop of chimps will impose restrictions of the members; certain shows of aggression are allowed, while others are not. You can challenge the leader in order to take his place… and you can intimidate individuals that are competing for position with you; on the other hand, unprovoked attacks, attacks on the young, attacks that go beyond intimidation/dominance displays will turn the whole troop against you. Protection of the troop against predators, resource sharing… or being able to do what you want, when you want. shrug Not dying alone and starving seems to be surprisingly popular choice.
Incidentally, most of the group compliance in chimps isn’t inborn, it’s learned. Young chimps are socialized the same way human children are; they experiment and are instructed by the older members what is acceptable, which they in turn pass on to their young. Human societies work the same way, only they are several orders of magnitude more complex.
The simplest thing in human behavior comparable to chimp socialization I can think of would be putting your hand to someone’s face. Babies reach up to their mother’s face, and the hand is removed… there’s often no need to even verbalize the restriction for it to be learned. Try face-palming a total stranger… it feels wrong. Not because there’s some objective reason for avoiding it… but because we’re social animals and trained to avoid it. Or step in a elevator with people and stand with your back to the doors. There’s no external source of morality dictating the correct orientation, it’s just how we’re wired.
…oh man I’m long winded… sorry.
I mean in the sense already explained, that we are social animals. Since humans are social animals, if we cease to be social animals we cease to be human.
Our sexual acts have social consequences and this is inherent in our natures. Our willlingness to accept the social consequences may make us choose not to engage in certain sexual acts which we would engage in if either (a) they did not have those consequences, or (b) we were indifferent to those consequences. It is not helpful, though, to consider this as a constraint on our freedom.
What further “consequence” is required beyond the physical, on this earth consequences of being subjectively considered “bad” by those being killed, raped, otherwise injured?
I mean, if this is it, all there is, and we are simply animals and nothing more, no heaven, no hell, no gods, no nothing but US in the physical realm, one life, that’s it and back into the great compost pile to be recycled, isn’t that an even STRONGER argument not to hurt one another and otherwise make life subjectively “good” and pleasant whenever possible?
I think so. The rationale that there is something else waiting, a “better place”, has been used to justify so much suffering and “bad” stuff throughout human history…this by those who believed in consequences beyond this realm.
I think the idea that this is IT folks is a powerful motivator to make THIS as “good” (as we subjectively consider that) as humanly possible. JMHO.