Read on Twitter
One of the goals of Schopenhauerian philosophy is to make this perspective clear.
As higher animals, we already feel this revulsion with many things, e.g. when someone "eats like a pig", but we should be expanding this to ordinary pleasures as much as possible.
E.g. sex https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1322527573247725575
As higher animals, we already feel this revulsion with many things, e.g. when someone "eats like a pig", but we should be expanding this to ordinary pleasures as much as possible.
E.g. sex https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1322527573247725575
I'll begin by saying what makes something disgusting.
Something is disgusting when it clings to life, see e.g. https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1319625581114331138
Something is disgusting when it clings to life, see e.g. https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1319625581114331138
Someone gorging on food is disgusting because it shows they are clinging to life
It only ceases to be disgusting when you are in on it, so to speak. When you're the one giving into it, you don't perceive the disgust. You see it as a self-evidently worthwhile affirmation of life.
It only ceases to be disgusting when you are in on it, so to speak. When you're the one giving into it, you don't perceive the disgust. You see it as a self-evidently worthwhile affirmation of life.
Thus, your own saliva, your own desires, your own flatulence, etc, isn't disgusting. You are "in on it" and your existence feels invested in it, so it's fine in your eyes.
When you have a more distant perspective, you are better able to see it as disgusting.
When you have a more distant perspective, you are better able to see it as disgusting.
Flesh is sticky, gooey and excessive, and is therefore disgusting. It is abiding by the will-to-life in the most radical manner.
Fat is a globular excess, and is the result of a body hoarding material for itself. It looks cumbersome and thus disagreeable.
Fat is a globular excess, and is the result of a body hoarding material for itself. It looks cumbersome and thus disagreeable.
With sex, however, these concerns diminish almost entirely. It's a corporeal indulgence which makes you feel guilty to some extent. As I point out in this tweet: https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1318912028610908161
Sex, even the most ordinary, is on a scale of perversion.
A fetish is not qualitatively different from normal sexual lust. It is just a more intense and degenerate version of what is already disgusting.
It pursues more slime, more filth, more globular, more flesh.
A fetish is not qualitatively different from normal sexual lust. It is just a more intense and degenerate version of what is already disgusting.
It pursues more slime, more filth, more globular, more flesh.
Sexual desire is knowingly reducing yourself to animal status, and taking some joy in the fact that there is a ready-made route to satisfaction.
You can just sink into it, and abandon the usual burden of trying to remain upright.
You can just sink into it, and abandon the usual burden of trying to remain upright.
You feel ashamed as you let go in this manner, but the will-to-life gets the better of you. The pre-made route feels like it is self-evidently worth pursuing. You can engage in repetitive mechanical action, and your consciousness is now in free-flow.
This seems like a good deal, because free-flowing consciousness is much harder to achieve when you're not being degenerate.
When you're standing upright and not being degenerate, you are assuming a burden of general stiffness so you don't leak urine/waste/etc.
When you're standing upright and not being degenerate, you are assuming a burden of general stiffness so you don't leak urine/waste/etc.
You are also making sure your animal nature doesn't appear in conversation. In short, you are trying to temper the will-to-life. It's a heavy tension.
Sexual pleasure is the most sought after because it is the most wholesale undoing of this tension.
Sexual pleasure is the most sought after because it is the most wholesale undoing of this tension.
It is completely abandoning yourself to the will-to-life, which means abandoning higher ideation.
Humans who instantiate the will-to-life more have a greater desire to be around other people. Practical everyday life ensures they are physically separated to some extent.
Humans who instantiate the will-to-life more have a greater desire to be around other people. Practical everyday life ensures they are physically separated to some extent.
Polite society also demands some distance, lest we all get broiled up in ape-like social dramas every other hour.
Alcohol numbs the mind, and sinks people into a more will-to-life objectified state. Blood starts flowing more easily, and they lean toward fleshly expression.
Alcohol numbs the mind, and sinks people into a more will-to-life objectified state. Blood starts flowing more easily, and they lean toward fleshly expression.
They can finally commune with their fellow species in a more animal fashion. This makes them feel more at ease.
They indulge their impulses without worrying about effects on civilisation and societal morality.
From the distant Schopenhauerian perspective, this is already crude.
They indulge their impulses without worrying about effects on civilisation and societal morality.
From the distant Schopenhauerian perspective, this is already crude.
There's a kind of sliminess to it, as expressed in paintings like these.
Think of the way drunk people hang on you, holding you back, wishing you'd indulge their drunkenness.
Think of the way drunk people hang on you, holding you back, wishing you'd indulge their drunkenness.
(Gifted philosophers don't get drunk like this. They tend to remain in control of themselves and then fall asleep without much drama. It's because their civilised behaviour was never an act in the first place.)
Anyway, back to sex.
Anyway, back to sex.
Sexual desire is along this very trajectory of sinking into overly social ape behaviour.
The man is particularly attracted to the woman in this process, because she is so much less threatening and gentle. She is slightly alarmed by this, so keeps her wits about her.
The man is particularly attracted to the woman in this process, because she is so much less threatening and gentle. She is slightly alarmed by this, so keeps her wits about her.
A man is likewise alarmed by his fellow man. He always remains somewhat respectful of distance with men, because he knows men don't want to be dominated entirely.
When he is around a woman, though, he is pulled into her weakness.
When he is around a woman, though, he is pulled into her weakness.
Her very appearance of weakness invites a corresponding strength. She puts up a flimsy and unconvincing resistance, which only makes him more invested in her, because he has fallen into a mechanical repetition.
Letting go and moving on would require higher ideation.
Letting go and moving on would require higher ideation.
If she finds him to be of sufficiently biological quality, she will not be entirely averse to his manoeuvres. She will find it curiously exciting that someone is attached to her. She wonders if this can be to her advantage.
All this time, he yearns for her flesh.
All this time, he yearns for her flesh.
When he makes a bold enough move, the woman will surrender herself to the danger, and in this very act of acceptance, she will take some joy in the pre-made animal route being realised.
The man will likewise enjoy this descent into animalhood.
The man will likewise enjoy this descent into animalhood.
It's a thoughtless, effortless mechanical drive. Humans are sinful here, because they are *aware* of their descent.
As they latch onto the flesh, they are doubly aware that this is a defilement of their higher ideation, which makes them feel free in a way animals don't.
As they latch onto the flesh, they are doubly aware that this is a defilement of their higher ideation, which makes them feel free in a way animals don't.
It is the acceptance of their defilement which is a cheap replica of *philosophical acceptance*.
"Accepting" you're gay by indulging gay sex is not some lofty acceptance; it's coping, namely by running away from the duty of transcending flesh and the will-to-life.
"Accepting" you're gay by indulging gay sex is not some lofty acceptance; it's coping, namely by running away from the duty of transcending flesh and the will-to-life.
Real acceptance is accepting that the material world is your enemy, not your friend. This requires a distant perspective of the slimy addiction of flesh and matter, which immobilises and denigrates you.
Now, let's actually examine more closely why flesh is disgusting.
Now, let's actually examine more closely why flesh is disgusting.
The attractive female body is often what stands between saint and sin.
Why do we find it so attractive? I discuss this in some detail in the attached thread, but I'd like to go into more detail here. https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1313480370269061122
Why do we find it so attractive? I discuss this in some detail in the attached thread, but I'd like to go into more detail here. https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1313480370269061122
It is mostly subcutaneous fat, which is just globular sacs containing food.
They accumulate around the breast because it is a kind of degenerative tissue, which started off as a sweat gland. It secretes cytoplasm from over-active cells, in this case the sugar lactose.
They accumulate around the breast because it is a kind of degenerative tissue, which started off as a sweat gland. It secretes cytoplasm from over-active cells, in this case the sugar lactose.
All globules give off a round and well-defined appearance. A sphere is the simplest idea we can conceive of, and so it strikes us as something nature intended us to pay attention to.
I mention this in the attached tweet: https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1313486341427126277
I mention this in the attached tweet: https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1313486341427126277
Given the person is well-formed in all other ways (e.g. taut healthy skin, obviously human appearance, etc), and because we see it so universally in the weaker sex, we associate this with healthy womanhood.
A residual recollection of a bosom's utility in childhood adds to this.
A residual recollection of a bosom's utility in childhood adds to this.
Breastfeeding is no longer part of everyday life, so we've lost this association somewhat, but it's still there.
It appears as something like a fruit.
A general level of plumpness in a woman coveys this too. Schopenhauer calls it the "vegetative function" here:
It appears as something like a fruit.
A general level of plumpness in a woman coveys this too. Schopenhauer calls it the "vegetative function" here:
Vegetation is a kind of excess of carbohydrate, an addition of resources.
This is metaphysically analogous with women's desire to stack up the fridge with far too much food. They feel like enough is never enough.
This is metaphysically analogous with women's desire to stack up the fridge with far too much food. They feel like enough is never enough.
Due to a lack of skeletal muscle, there is a tendency for bottom-heaviness in women. I assume there is a superfluity of fat cells which eventually accumulate, with help of gravity, in the buttocks and thighs.
With their skin still taut, this round accumulation looks healthy.
With their skin still taut, this round accumulation looks healthy.
The fact that it maintains its form despite all kinds of disruptive motions shows that it is a well-defined object which nature did not lose sight of (i.e. it is no accident).
Now, all of this becomes more profound when we consider that the vagina is an inverted penis.
Now, all of this becomes more profound when we consider that the vagina is an inverted penis.
For it is with this realisation that it becomes apparent that women are basically men, except with extreme gynecomastia and muscular-skeletal weakness.
I've discussed this here: https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1313549388652961792
For now, notice the anatomical similarity by looking at ambiguous genitalia.
I've discussed this here: https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1313549388652961792
For now, notice the anatomical similarity by looking at ambiguous genitalia.
This is also highly relevant: https://twitter.com/tom_username_/status/1313871236716519424
Now, return your mind to what I said earlier about the social impulse. In its most condensed form, it's this kind of slimy, animalistic impulse to be in the presence of other people.
Christianity, thank God, tempered this impulse. Recall what pagans were capable of.
Christianity, thank God, tempered this impulse. Recall what pagans were capable of.
(In the warmer climates especially, there was less shame of being part of the animal kingdom.)
When a man pursues a woman, he is taking this slimy impulse as far as it can go. He wants to be conjoined with her to the maximum extent possible. This is the basis of sexual desire.
When a man pursues a woman, he is taking this slimy impulse as far as it can go. He wants to be conjoined with her to the maximum extent possible. This is the basis of sexual desire.
He pursues it with woman not man because her weakness and encumbered appearance make her seem like a more abundant and ready-made route for his instincts.
A man looks like a weapon. Women looks like a cove.
A man looks like a weapon. Women looks like a cove.
When with a woman, a man feels opened up. His usual guard is put down, as this moment was subconsciously the aim of his life.
He wanted to be in the midst of a moment which confirmed his earthly value and worthiness in the most radical possible manner, i.e. sex.
He wanted to be in the midst of a moment which confirmed his earthly value and worthiness in the most radical possible manner, i.e. sex.
His whole life is governed by a question mark over his head: whether or not he is meant for this world.
When he imagines that an affirmative answer is forthcoming, he gives up all higher ideation and imagines what it would be like.
When he imagines that an affirmative answer is forthcoming, he gives up all higher ideation and imagines what it would be like.
If a woman dresses scantily, this is more easily imagined. If sufficiently presented with the prospect, he gives in entirely, leading to dilation of blood vessels and thus an erection.
Assuming he knows nothing of sex to begin with, the penis naturally ends up in the vagina.
Assuming he knows nothing of sex to begin with, the penis naturally ends up in the vagina.
The anatomical contrast makes it necessary, but this is not the only reason sexual intercourse takes place.
There is a longing to delve ever further into her, which is why all kinds of disgusting acts are performed with the tongue. The aim is really biological union.
There is a longing to delve ever further into her, which is why all kinds of disgusting acts are performed with the tongue. The aim is really biological union.
To repeat: sex is just the extreme version of conviviality. An animalistic desire to around your species in the hope of securing prospects therein.
Penetration into the female is the triumph of this impulse.
Penetration into the female is the triumph of this impulse.
The following remarks on ejaculation will be disgusting, but it's necessary to understand the ugly details if one is to understand what is really going on here.
At the end of this thread, I will compile everything said so far into the full Platonic Idea.
At the end of this thread, I will compile everything said so far into the full Platonic Idea.
Essentially, in the course of an erection, a muscle is being stretched against its will by the entry of too much blood into the penis.
Ejaculation is the moment when that muscle can't stretch any more, and a reflex (like a hammer on knee) tries to shoot it back to normality.
Ejaculation is the moment when that muscle can't stretch any more, and a reflex (like a hammer on knee) tries to shoot it back to normality.
The precise mechanics aren't relevant to the phenomenological analysis.
Essentially, the feeling of climax is the moment when a reflex takes over, and you're letting the ready-made route my nature do its thing without your cognitive input.
Essentially, the feeling of climax is the moment when a reflex takes over, and you're letting the ready-made route my nature do its thing without your cognitive input.
You're accepting that flesh is doing it for you. The fact that you have no input concludes your descent into will-to-life objectification.
With that, the strain of wanting to be part of this material world is finally ended. You're assured that you've achieved the pinnacle.
With that, the strain of wanting to be part of this material world is finally ended. You're assured that you've achieved the pinnacle.
Your life was dominated by an animalistic desire for the utmost version of conviviality (i.e. sexual consummation), and you pursued it to the extreme until your body could take it no more.
Having done that, you're briefly assured that this is the end of life. No more is needed.
Having done that, you're briefly assured that this is the end of life. No more is needed.
You then chase the experience of "This is the end of life. No more is needed."
You know no other way of doing this than by clinging to the process of sexual gratification. You are then locked into that mechanical process.
You know no other way of doing this than by clinging to the process of sexual gratification. You are then locked into that mechanical process.
But it would be better and correct if, in the first place, you realised that it wouldn't lead to lasting satisfaction, and that it was predicated on a general uncertainty about your prospects in this world, i.e. on suffering.
Sexual gratification is only the momentary release.
Sexual gratification is only the momentary release.
You were scared of being left behind, of not being privy to the purpose of life, so you placated this uncertainty by pursuing it to the utmost.
Man is the active element in this, because women are the weaker, more penetrable ones.
Man is the active element in this, because women are the weaker, more penetrable ones.
Only in the act of copulation do human beings finally attain to a single organism. Prior to that, they are like incomplete jigsaw puzzles, constantly in search of something else to fit.
If humans asexually reproduced, conviviality would no longer be a strong and basic desire.
If humans asexually reproduced, conviviality would no longer be a strong and basic desire.
The female body is a vegetative excess, and wants to reproduce vegetatively (hence it produces eggs).
It is constantly leaking into excess in anticipation of danger. It thus has a clumsy appearance, which man nonetheless wants because he feels incomplete in himself.
It is constantly leaking into excess in anticipation of danger. It thus has a clumsy appearance, which man nonetheless wants because he feels incomplete in himself.
He sees woman as a torchbearer for flesh. He vaguely feels that only she will secure him a spot in the animal kingdom as other men have
He has only one way of finding this out, and that is by pursuing her to the utmost, and in so doing, expending his seed
Since time immemorial:
He has only one way of finding this out, and that is by pursuing her to the utmost, and in so doing, expending his seed
Since time immemorial:
For him to ignore her would be tantamount to exiting the animal kingdom, and the average pleb has no conception of this. He is only capable of deriving his values from the ready-made route put forward by the animal kingdom.
Geniuses and religious leaders have to impose values.
Geniuses and religious leaders have to impose values.
Geniuses and religious leaders manage to perceive the basic error at play, and in this way become self-sufficient.
With them, the animal kingdom reaches a full stop. The ceiling is reached. They stand atop the heap, and say "Life is a delusion as to the nature of existence."
With them, the animal kingdom reaches a full stop. The ceiling is reached. They stand atop the heap, and say "Life is a delusion as to the nature of existence."
"It's just a self-gratifying realm of people using each other, for no other purpose than the reproduction of other people using other people. If there is to be anything ennobling in all this, it is the realisation of this error, and the material instalment of the opposite view."
I've just described liberal democracy here too, as it is nothing but the will-to-life also.
It's people using other people, and finding something glorious in this arrangement, because it is in fact beholding to the delusion. They're in on it, so they don't see the issue.
It's people using other people, and finding something glorious in this arrangement, because it is in fact beholding to the delusion. They're in on it, so they don't see the issue.
If you don't see the error in this degeneration, you are pulling us down toward the animal kingdom.
To the extent you do see some error in pursuing life for its own sake, you are helping to ensuring that there is still yet a path out of the animal kingdom.
To the extent you do see some error in pursuing life for its own sake, you are helping to ensuring that there is still yet a path out of the animal kingdom.
You must see something foul in conviviality
You must see something disgusting in the average human being, especially as we become increasingly beholden to life. Our ridiculous clothes, our alcohol and junkfood-induced illnesses, our silly health measures, our hypocrisy and lies.
You must see something disgusting in the average human being, especially as we become increasingly beholden to life. Our ridiculous clothes, our alcohol and junkfood-induced illnesses, our silly health measures, our hypocrisy and lies.
The way we smell when we go one day without washing. The hideous biological waste we produce. The gases we emit from our orifices. The fur growing out of us. The way we disintegrate as we grow old.
It all betokens a mistaken mode of existence.
It all betokens a mistaken mode of existence.
The person who perceives all of this will distance himself from the animal kingdom, as he will know that it's not flesh that makes existence good, but unmolested spirit—that to which he will return when all of this is over.
He will happily endure the cold, lonely heights.
He will happily endure the cold, lonely heights.
Nietzsche and Schopenhauer.
Also note that Jesus' transfiguation was on a mountain. Moses was on Mount Sinai. Muhummad on Mount Hira.
It is the mark of exiting the animal kingdom.
Also note that Jesus' transfiguation was on a mountain. Moses was on Mount Sinai. Muhummad on Mount Hira.
It is the mark of exiting the animal kingdom.
