Psychoanalyzing the sexual revolutionary

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JimG

Guest
By Edward Feser
An excerpt:

“Suppose that some people had a strange psychological deformation that led them to take intense pleasure in entertaining the thought that 2 + 2 = 5. Repeated indulgence of the desire to contemplate this proposition would make such contemplation addictive, and the very idea that there is such a thing as an objective arithmetical truth to the effect that 2 + 2 = 4 would lose its hold on such a person. He might judge that it is objectively true instead that 2 + 2 = 5, or he might reject altogether the idea that there is such a thing as objective truth where arithmetic is concerned. Either way, his intellect will have been blinded. That is analogous to the blindness of mind that can follow upon ingrained sexual vice.”

 
Last edited:
I’m sure it would. He is not an easy read, but maybe conversation would be more amenable.
 
Most of the shooters and domestic terrorists ar the current time are young, Male, White and part of the Incel Movement, Males angry about being “forced into celibacy” by circumstances. Contrary to popular belief, they’re NOT libertine. The days of those mass killers who were also libertines like Charles Manson ended 50 years ago.
 
Well yes, I agree. But Feser is not writing about the Incel Movement, but the sexual revolution, which has been largely successful in substituting its moral code for traditional morality.
 
“Suppose that some people had a strange psychological deformation that led them to take intense pleasure in entertaining the thought that 2 + 2 = 5.

OK

Repeated indulgence of the desire to contemplate this proposition would make such contemplation addictive,

Evidence?

and the very idea that there is such a thing as an objective arithmetical truth to the effect that 2 + 2 = 4 would lose its hold on such a person.

Evidence?

He might judge that it is objectively true instead that 2 + 2 = 5,

Evidence?

or he might reject altogether the idea that there is such a thing as objective truth where arithmetic is concerned.

Evidence?

Either way, his intellect will have been blinded.

Will it?

That is analogous to the blindness of mind that can follow upon ingrained sexual vice.”

Is it?
 
Last edited:
JimG said:
“Suppose that some people had a strange psychological deformation that led them to take intense pleasure in entertaining the thought that 2 + 2 = 5
Click to expand...
What are you talking about? They simply use a different axiomatic system. If someone uses the Euclidean foundation of geometry and some else uses the Riemann (spherical) geometry, then it does not follow that one of them has a “strange psychological deformation”, or that they derive some “intense pleasure” from using that system. They are both correct WITHIN their axioms.

We call moral behavior to adhere to a specific ethical system. And ethical systems are dime a dozen. There is no epistemological method to decide if one system (for example: divine command theory) is better or superior to another one (for example: virtue ethics).
 
JimG said:
“Suppose that some people had a strange psychological deformation that led them to take intense pleasure in entertaining the thought that 2 + 2 = 5.
Click to expand...
The sexual revolution is essentially about autonomy, not moral truth. Reason and morality doesn’t come into it accept as a means of of identifying impracticality.
 
Last edited:
The sexual revolution was all about attempting to deny morality. Something that cannot and has not happened to this day. All that has happened is a level of suppression and the answer to that is not to participate in immoral hedonism.
 
edwest211 said:
The sexual revolution was all about attempting to deny morality.
Click to expand...
Denying morality is just a side effect of the objective. It’s not so much an attempt to attack morality or Christianity, but rather it is an attempt to normalise that which is desirable. It just so happens to be the case that what is desirable to them happens to be or is said to be immoral. The fact that it is the anti-Christ speaks to something that not many are aware of. Not everybody that worships the image of the beast knows that this is what they are in fact doing.
 
Last edited:
At the time - the late 1960s - this is what Catholics got: “All you do is listen to the Pope. Why don’t you think for yourselves?”

Translation: Why don’t you think like us?

And you could see it in their faces. They lived in the neighborhood. They saw us Catholic kids go to school, behave well and go to Church, and lead decent lives. Not perfect, decent. They hated that with a passion. They wanted their random sex, boozing and drug using to become the norm. And they worked hard to wreck everything. Are they happier today? I sincerely doubt it.
 
Last edited:
edwest211 said:
They hated that with a passion.
Click to expand...
I wonder, on what ground can you assert that you had access to their thoughts… the thoughts of each and every one of them. Maybe they felt sorry for you, knowing that you miss out on all the fun they had. After all, from their perspective you wasted your life, and they might have tried to help you.

Is that something that you consider impossible? Do you think that non-believers are filled with hate?
edwest211 said:
And they worked hard to wreck everything.
Click to expand...
Wow. Is that an example of Christian “charity”?
 
One really big change I’ve seen is this—

When I was a teenager, kids who chose to have sex and kids who chose to abstain could still be friends. They could and did talk about it and debate it and discuss it, but at the end of the day, they were still friends.

When one of the girls at my school got pregnant, her best friend (who remained a virgin until her wedding day) stepped forward and helped with babysitting and emotional support, etc. And not in a judgey or condescending way, either. She just behaved like a friend.

But nowadays, the attitude seems to be “think like me or I won’t be your friend anymore”.
 
You appear to have not lived through the time period. Do not make assumptions based on your own biases.
  1. They, by word and deed, lived the opposite way that we were living. No need to access their thoughts. There is a saying: Actions speak louder than words.
  2. I can provide a detailed list of all the things that happened starting in the 1960s that led to today.
Please do not add false color to what I write.
 
I answered your questions. But don’t put accusations in question form, OK?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top