Re: hedonism

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Chalkboard: @Salon ] [ Help ]

Posted by Stephen on April 15, 1999 at 20:08:18:
From

In Reply to: Re: hedonism posted by Perfume on November 08, 1996 at 01:30:25:

yes but Freud contibuted to the best and worst of the sexual revolution when he recommended that the act was a good alternative to masturbation.

if these great men such as freud and nietzche and schoepenhauer could get over their Victorianistic
straitjackets, we would be better off.

hedonism has let to the same problems that plagued the greeks and the romans who followed hedonism.
Byzantium and its pursuit into the depths of depravity is proof of that. As were Caligula's excesses.

therefore, one needs to take a moderate path between extreme hedonism and extreme ascetism, as did the Buddha.

: :
: : s because all moral/ethical philosophies have held happiness as their end, although extrinsic happiness has almost always taken value above intrinsic happiness( it's much more dignified). psychological hedonism has been the motivating force for human actions to the point where it is generally accepted as logical to seek happiness and avoid pain. go pleasure(base or epicurean!!!!!!!!!!!!!

: question is that intrinsic happiness is bound to relate to this expression that is not translatable into the English language, called 'jouissance' in the French. And this is not 'joy' as we understand it in English, but the pleasure or joy of the pain. that is that there is pain in 'intrinsic happiness' and this pain is not dignified because it has an 'autistic' quality to it... That is that the place from where we may enjoy pain is the very subjective... and this is 'beyond the pleasure principle'... if we want to call on Freud himself.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: yes but Freud contibuted to the best and worst of the sexual revolution when he recommended that the act was a good alternative to masturbation. : if these great men such as freud and nietzche and schoepenhauer could get over their Victorianistic : straitjackets, we would be better off. : hedonism has let to the same problems that plagued the greeks and the romans who followed hedonism. : Byzantium and its pursuit into the depths of depravity is proof of that. As were Caligula's excesses. : therefore, one needs to take a moderate path between extreme hedonism and extreme ascetism, as did the Buddha. : : : : : : s because all moral/ethical philosophies have held happiness as their end, although extrinsic happiness has almost always taken value above intrinsic happiness( it's much more dignified). psychological hedonism has been the motivating force for human actions to the point where it is generally accepted as logical to seek happiness and avoid pain. go pleasure(base or epicurean!!!!!!!!!!!!! : : question is that intrinsic happiness is bound to relate to this expression that is not translatable into the English language, called 'jouissance' in the French. And this is not 'joy' as we understand it in English, but the pleasure or joy of the pain. that is that there is pain in 'intrinsic happiness' and this pain is not dignified because it has an 'autistic' quality to it... That is that the place from where we may enjoy pain is the very subjective... and this is 'beyond the pleasure principle'... if we want to call on Freud himself.

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Chalkboard: @Salon ] [ Help ]