28 May 06
Originally posted by dottewellOnly you would be able to answer that question. For example, I don't have any sexual fantasies at all. I am sure many people believe that it's not possible to live a fully flourishing life without sexual fantasies and/or sex, and many will say that I am not mentally healthy because I don't have that. But I am the one living my life, and I know it's not a bad life.
Imagine I spend almost every waking hour thinking of ways to hurt people in incredibly cruel ways, etc. etc. I never actually act on any of these thoughts; in fact I live on a deserted island. And I am very kind to the animals.
Am I living a fully flourishing life? A good life?
How relevant is the number of these thoughts/fantasies that I have? And why?
The more time you spend with those fantasies, the less time you have for other things. Again, that doesn't necessarily have to be unhealthy. In your scenario, it won't have an impact on other people, and you might not have so much else to do. So if it were your choice in this situation, that would probably be okay. But if it had become an addiction and you would prefer to do other things, but had lost control, it would be a bad thing.
28 May 06
Originally posted by mokkoI'm not sure what I meant, mokko. I think I imagined a science fiction sort of situation in which my fantasies become a reality in another universe, and/or visa-versa. And I've always thought that most of us live on the cusp of insanity and I can imagine a situation in which I gradually slipped into living out my fantasies for real while still believing they are fantasies.
Trust me I wasn't going to get involved in this whole debacle either. But the fact that I have always indulged in a fullfilling fantasy life while living an extremely functional reality has forced me to question some of the views expressed.
I'm very curious to know in what possible scenario would your personal inner fantasies become someone elses reality ( ...[text shortened]... t purposes and are not taken into the real world when the book is closed or the movie done.
29 May 06
Originally posted by dottewellIf my fantasies only involved violent scenarios then yes, I would become concerned. Just as anyone constantly fantasizing about children should be concerned and seek guidance.
Look up the definition of paedophilia.
There's no healthy fantasy involving under-age kids.
And - by the way - instead of revelling in your "violence" fantasies, you might want to consider what they say about you. Just advice; take it or leave it.
I certainly do not spent considerable amounts of time obsessing and fantasizing about violence and sex. So I don't feel it says a whole lot about me to have such thoughts from time to time.
It just appears that you feel it necissary to condem people for their thoughts. And unless somebody openly confesses to having such thoughts how are you to know who is thinking what at any given moment in time. There is a huge distinction that isn't being acknowledged between normal rational people having the occasional abnormal thought or fantasy as opposed to abnormal and irrational people obsessing over one particular thought or fantasy.
29 May 06
Originally posted by NordlysI am sure many people believe that it's not possible to live a fully flourishing life without sexual fantasies and/or sex
Only you would be able to answer that question. For example, I don't have any sexual fantasies at all. I am sure many people believe that it's not possible to live a fully flourishing life without sexual fantasies and/or sex, and many will say that I am not mentally healthy because I don't have that. But I am the one living my life, and I know it's not a bad ...[text shortened]... on and you would prefer to do other things, but had lost control, it would be a bad thing.
That's not actually harmful to you. I don't see why yours would be a bad life.
29 May 06
Originally posted by mokkoLook, let's boil this down. We are not talking about fleeting thoughts. I'm saying there are no healthy fantasies about underage kids. Is that true or false?
If my fantasies only involved violent scenarios then yes, I would become concerned. Just as anyone constantly fantasizing about children should be concerned and seek guidance.
I certainly do not spent considerable amounts of time obsessing and fantasizing about violence and sex. So I don't feel it says a whole lot about me to have such thoughts from time t ...[text shortened]... as opposed to abnormal and irrational people obsessing over one particular thought or fantasy.
30 May 06
I've always considered fantasy to be so very separate from real life that (to me) it's a ridiculous notion a fantasy in itself can be considered harmful (or even unhealthy). No matter what it's content.
But Dotte & co (no offense "company" but I can't very well write down all your usernames here - that would truly waste space - which this parenthesis does not) seem convinced that fantasy is a prelude to real action. Perhaps that's how dotte & co work, I don't know. But if that's the case, I should definitely not want anyone like them elaborating their "unwanted" thoughts into sexual fantasies.
30 May 06
Originally posted by dottewellMany people believe sex and/or sexual fantasies to be an essential part of life. If that were the case, not having them would be harmful in the same way not eating food would be harmful.
I am sure many people believe that it's not possible to live a fully flourishing life without sexual fantasies and/or sex
That's not actually harmful to you. I don't see why yours would be a bad life.
I think you still haven't explained why or in which way you think sexual fantasies about children are harmful to the person having them (if you have, I must have missed it). Can you elaborate? Just to clarify, I am talking about fantasies without the urge to do these things in reality.
30 May 06
1 edit
Originally posted by NordlysFrom an hedonist view (I know he's not one but its the easiest way to picture it), one could argue that the absence of pleasure derived from such fantasies is not pain in itself.
Many people believe sex and/or sexual fantasies to be an essential part of life. If that were the case, not having them would be harmful in the same way not eating food would be harmful.
I think you still haven't explained why or in which way you think sexual fantasies about children are harmful to the person having them (if you have, I must have missed i ...[text shortened]... ? Just to clarify, I am talking about fantasies without the urge to do these things in reality.
30 May 06
Originally posted by PalynkaI first read that as "absence-of-pleasure derived from such fantasies" instead of "absence of pleasure-derived-from-such-fantasies". Oops.
From an hedonist view (I know he's not one but its the easiest way to picture it), one could argue that the absence of pleasure derived from such fantasies is not pain in itself.
My own view, of course, is that the absence of those pleasures is neither painful nor harmful. But if you think of sex/sexual fantasies as essential, not having them is not just the absence of pleasure.
30 May 06
Originally posted by NordlysBut he said a "fully flourishing life", which may imply that for people that think that (non-platonic) love (or even having children) is essential to live such a life, the absence of such "pleasure" (here we enter more hedaimonic territory so the word is probably innacurate) is sufficient to prevent you from living a "fully flourished life".
I first read that as "absence-of-pleasure derived from such fantasies" instead of "absence of pleasure-derived-from-such-fantasies". Oops.
My own view, of course, is that the absence of those pleasures is neither painful nor harmful. But if you think of sex/sexual fantasies as essential, not having them is not just the absence of pleasure.
It is not just the absence of pleasure, since it is more of a eudaimonic view, but it is not "harmful" either, just a barrier to such a flourishing.
(sorry for the erratic thinking and phrasing)
30 May 06
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaYou can live a bad and/or unhealthy mental life, a good and/or healthy mental life, and perhaps a mental life that is neither.
But he said a "fully flourishing life", which may imply that for people that think that (non-platonic) love (or even having children) is essential to live such a life, the absence of such "pleasure" (here we enter more hedaimonic territory so the word is probably innacurate) is sufficient to prevent you from living a "fully flourished life".
It is not jus , just a barrier to such a flourishing.
(sorry for the erratic thinking and phrasing)
I really pity (and worry about) people who seem to think the only morally important difference is between thought and action. If people who think like Stocken (and I am not saying Stocken himself) think it's perfectly fine to say "I have fantasies about young people, but I don't quite fit the clinical definition of a paedophile [because of e.g. the frequency of these fantasies]", then as far as I am concerned there is an element of their mental life which is quite clearly unhealthy, and bad, and if they can't see this then really that is their problem, because it should be obvious to any decent human being.
I really won't have any further part of this discussion because it is frankly rather repulsive.