Good morning everyone. Here’s a link to my patreon, where you can find my ebooks/lectures/transcripts, and our discord+bonus seminars. www.patreon.com/julianphilosophy
I recently read the work of Frans de Waal, who describes how Bonobo's (one of our close primate relatives) engage in all sorts of sexual practices purely for their enjoyment, including masturbation (and mutual masturbation), oral sex as well as homosexual practices. Also, they often engage in sex with each other without ending with orgasm, so it's just for fun/pleasure and as a social interaction. Of course, human beings are not bonobos. But the idea that sex (as an instinct) is necessarily about reproduction is false. Bonobos are also polymorphously perverse.
can't be a problem philosophically or otherwise if I never have it soooooooo i wonder if any philosopher has written about the existential implications of being suffocatingly unembraced :(
It feels like this unraveling, understanding, demystifying of life somehow reduces the enjoyment of it. Like exiting the matrix and just staring at code all day. I’m curious how you feel in regard to this? Do you ever wish you could go back and never discover philosophy?
You should watch the TEDx talk "Time, for a change" by Ole Peters. He is the leading scientist behind Ergodicity Economics, which is an emerging science with MASSIVE implications for the study of income inequality in societies. That will be a truth that excites you. As much as I love philosophy and psychoanalysis, and as much insight as they provide in some ways, I feel that in other ways it is a little limited in its navigational power. At least for me. Although, Gabriel Tupinamba in his book "the Desire of Psychoanalysis" (which Zizek sincerely praises in the forward) makes the point that Psychoanalysis has access to it's own universality, which should not be presupposed to be a philosophical universality. That is to say, the categories of "Psychotic, Neurotic, Pervert, Phobic" etc. do not define a priori philosophical stances, so if they have any universality it will be of psychoanalytic import (often clinical) rather than INHERENTLY philosophical, like Zizek has claimed. That isn't to say that these Psychoanalytic universalities have nothing to say about philosophy--they absolutely do. And that's the point Zupancic makes in her book, for which Tupinamba has a glowing review that includes a great comparison between her work and Zizek's. But as for the critique of neoclassical Economics and the relevance it has to income inequality, I'm only sharing it because it sounds like you may be sympathetic to myself and Tupinamba's view that Psychoanalysis has to be willing to work alongside other disciplines when seeking solutions to social and individual issues rather than presupposing that it supercedes them in some inherent way. Or maybe I read your comment wrong. But either way, with philosophy, I feel like at a certain point you can't really go any further, and that seems to be a sentiment you were expressing.😢
Huge fan of the channel and the human running it, and trying not to be difficult but… Pardon My French as way to alleviate swearing is very triggering to me and I would prefer not to hear it. 🙏🏼
I'm a fan... so says a commenter... but the manner in which you elect to deliver your content is not to my liking.. just saying.. lol... wild... sex without the unsavory (or its sublimated, as such more sexual reflex)... 😅
