Re: agrote
OmSigDAVID wrote:Does this have consequences, in the real world ?
In other words (respectfully) SO WHAT ?
Is any man accountable to his fellows for what he THINKS
One's individual rights end where their fellow man's right to peaceful coexistence begins. One is only accountable to his own self for his thoughts.
Quote:Is the individual responsible
for what he thinks, in the privacy of his own mind ?
That's a very vague question, but I think I know what you are trying to say and no I don't believe in thought crimes. I do, however, believe in being responsible for one's own thoughts.
Quote:Shoud societ try to build equipment
to invade that privacy and monitor what the citizens are thinking ?
I imagine that there would be compelling financial reasons for members of society to attempt this but again if you are asking if I believe in thought crimes I don't.
Quote:
The Red Chinese and North Koreans did that.
During the Korean War, we captured them with pocket diaries
that thay were required to fill out, as to their thoughts.
In a religious context as a child I had to do the same, I am not a fan and you are barking up the wrong tree. I am not saying that thought should be policed by government. I am saying that each individual has a degree of control, and therefore responsibility, for their thoughts.
Quote:
Quote:What about deliberately stoking fantasies that might
make their compulsions harder to control?
Is there evidence of this ?
That indulging in fantasy "might" make compulsions harder to control? That's a statement of possibility and the only way to prove it would be to prove the absence of evidence that it's impossible.
Given that it's a very pedestrian comment what are you really asking me to give evidence for? That it
will lead to realization? That there has been an established causative link?
If you are asking me to settle the nature/nurture debate with a nugget of "evidence" then I'm going to disappoint you. I, like all others, do not have such a nugget of wisdom to impart. The debate on the relative strength of nature and nurture will not be settled here.
Quote:
Can u distinguish the difference in probability
between making urges harder or easier to control ?
Of course not. You might have a general idea about yourself, knowing how strong your compulsions are and your typical reactions to extended fantasy but I can't mathematically quantify it for you. Of course, if you think about it for a bit you might come to agree with me that it would be ridiculous to believe that this can be done with mankind's present body of knowledge.
Quote:
Incidentally, correct me if I am rong,
but I do not remember Agrote asserting that he has urges to actually GRAB girls.
I don't think I claimed he did. In fact my guess is that his paraphilia, if present, is slight. But whatever his case may be, I am merely arguing that if one's indulgence in fantasy increases the probability of realization there are ethical arguments toward shunning the fantasy.
Whether that's relevant to agrote is something for him, not me, to figure out. I'm not arguing that he's a threat to society.
Quote:Is there evidence that Agrote is planning to DO anything illegal ?
Sigh. I have no idea, and have never claimed as much.
Quote:
If he looks at pornografy,
and if his sexual urges, such as thay may be, are released in catharsis
will that make " harmful consequences " more or less likely to result ?
Are there competent studies on this point ?
Whether or not the use of pornography would result in more or less probability of harm is not something that any "competent study" is going to answer either way in this case. Like much else in psychology it can go either way. The classic knock on psychology is that an abused child may grow to abuse or to have a particular distaste for abuse. In short, as a science there are a lot of areas that simply don't enjoy the kind of simplistic binary exactitude of other sciences that you are seeking.
Quote:Quote:It's pretty simple: fantasy and pornography can be addictive,
and lead to stronger compulsions.
Is there PROOF of this ?
Did Agrote say that he has COMPULSIONS ?
If he really does have "compulsions" will pornografy
relieve them catharticly, or worsen them ?
Is there objective evidence on this question ?
Here you go again asking for proof of a possibility. By its nature, a single example would constitute proof. I'm not going to get into moving the goal posts all over the place and try to provide you "objective evidence" of my claim that something is possible. You are asking for yes or no answers in a field of study where the answer is often "both" and asking me to provide simple citations to "prove" absolute positions I have not held.
Are you trying to say that indulging in fantasy can't ever result in an increased likelihood of realization? If not, then what are you asking me to "prove"? I'm not going to stake out a simplistic position in these long standing psychology debates and try to prove it to you and I made no such simplistic claims.
Quote:Mr. Gentel, in all candor,
I believe that people who promote the idea that their fellow citizens
( or subjects ? ) have a MORAL OBLIGATION concerning what thay
think about are very dangerous people; people with that mindset have
cost much blood and many lives. That is frightening, sir.
David, in all candor, you scare as easily as you get lost in a conversation. I don't advocate the thought police you imagine in my posts and you are sliding down your own slippery slope. Be scared if you wish, but comparing me to brutal authoritarians from the pages of history requires a serious reading impediment or a healthy imagination.
Quote:Quote:
It may not be, and neither you or I can know this now but that it may
presents a question of ethics even at the mental level.
Do ethics exist " at the mental level " ??
U appear to deny and negate the idea of autonomous sovereignty between the ears.
U 'd invite in the control of society, or its henchman government ?
David, that you managed to highlight each time I indicate "might", "may" and that it "may not be" and then spend a page asking me to prove that it
does is what I'm talking about with the reading incomprehension. It's tedious and I don't want to go in circles so I'm not going to try to imagine what you mean when you ask if ethics exists at the mental level and simply note that you imagine the threat to the sovereignty between your ears.
I've not in any way advocated society controlling thought and you can put away your imagined henchmen (who also think you are too paranoid).
