Guilt & Pleasure

[Trevor]

Trevor, is your question whether or not there is moral virtue in asceticism? or are you operating on the presumption that there is not?

An ethos wouldn't survive without virtues. The problem is when one set of ideals exist alongisde others, in this case, consumerism. Resulting in conflict. And the "guilt," for want of a better word, seems to be a part of that conflict. I guess I'm just curious as to how that guilt operates...

i don't think it's primarily a religious hangover, i think having guilt for indulging makes intuitive sense - hedonism can have a lot of deleterious effects on a person and that awareness is not born of religion, but rather of having indulged and suffered the consequences, which often include a hefty dose of remorse both emotional and physical. so no, it's not strictly a religious thing, i think it can also be a practical one.

What kind of "deleterious effects?" And might this "remorse" be a result of the supposed "guilt" as opposed to the result of the indulgence?

[uglypeoplefucking]

An ethos wouldn't survive without virtues. The problem is when one set of ideals exist alongisde others, in this case, consumerism. Resulting in conflict. And the "guilt," for want of a better word, seems to be a part of that conflict. I guess I'm just curious as to how that guilt operates...

hmm, still not sure what you're asking ... but i can be slow, forgive me.

What kind of "deleterious effects?" And might this "remorse" be a result of the supposed "guilt" as opposed to the result of the indulgence?

a drinker's remorse, or the remorse of the overeater, is the result of the indulgence. so is the guilt. the guilt is definitely part of the remorse, so the answer to your second question is yes, but guilt is not actually "opposed" in any way to the remorse, it's more like half of it.

[Trevor]

hmm, still not sure what you're asking ... but i can be slow, forgive me.

If you accept there's a conflict between the two camps, then I guess, I'm asking for an expose of one of the weapons of that conflcit: guilt/shame.

I see it as a power struggle. On the one hand is the ascetic ideal which denies pleasure from exterior sources i.e. objects e.g. Clothes, food, etc. And on the other hand is consumerism which places pleasure in those exterior objects and says it's ok to indulge oneself in those pleasures. Is the source of your value found within or without?

I guess the ascetic ideal is better described as a spiritual ideal rather than a religious one, and the interior of one's self, the spirit, is the source of value for that ideal i.e. a person is self-dependant. Whereas consumerism might say that the source of value is found in consumerables i.e. a person is (object-)dependant. So, in the power balance of these ideals guilt, or shame (might be more accurate), arises from the ascetic ideal because it is an open admission of powerless before objects i.e. one is object-dependant. The yelp of a wounded ideal.

The reason I thought of it being a religious guilt is because typically, many ascetics are/were of a religious bent. And the reason I think they were able to be self-sustainable, that they could live off the chew of their own fat, was because they were of firm belief i.e. their faith could maintain and sustain their probings. But today, people's interiors, if they are similar to me, are a confused mish-mash of conflicting beliefs and ideas, certainly nothing firm, I introspect and everything evaporates...so maybe it is of little surprise that a consumerist turns to the solidity of things outside, a thing of solidity can be depended on, relied upon, and comfort can be found in confidence of those things. Unlike our contemporary interiors.

[Humpty]

whoa you guys, i just happened upon this relevant article:
http://www.newkerala.com/news/world/ful ... 13154.html

A study discovered that non-believers are more willing to discuss sexual fantasies and are more satisfied with their experiences.

Both groups admitted indulging in masturbation, watching porn, having oral sex and pursuing affairs. But believers did not enjoy the experiences as much, being overcome by intense feelings of regret after climaxing, thanks to the stigma created by their belief systems.

[Trevor]

Yehh, I don't think its a massive surprise where sex is concerned, intriguing nonetheless...

[uglypeoplefucking]

Trevor, you highlight well how the personal conflict between spiritual and material satisfaction plays out in some people, and i am sure you are not the only one who experiences those particular dynamics - but i think the "war on want" (so to speak) can take many different forms, depending on the person. returning to something Turtle said, i think there is definitely a personal element to how and why guilt or shame is experienced. Just as an example, using Humpty's article, i imagine that while a lot of religious people self-report that they don't enjoy engaging in taboo sex as much as non-religious people due to religiously inspired guilt, i think some of them kind of get off on the the guilt and the feeling that what they are doing is shameful. i think a lot of people with orthodox religious beliefs about sex have a sort of guilt-fetish - part of the thrill of indulgence is the thought that what they are doing is forbidden or wrong. the penance they have to do by feeling guilty and shameful is all part of the ritual of engaging in devious, and therefore all-the-more-exciting, activities. just an example of the different ways guilt/shame may operate within different people ...

i think if you really want an expose, as you put it, of guilt and shame, you might try approaching it from the standpoint of evolutionary psychology ...

[Trevor]

Good post. I'm in retreat regarding the guilt/shame idea. I think the "reluctance" is nothing more than common sense protection of resources, which might fit your evolutionary-psyschology recommendation. Want Vs Necessity. There's probably more to be said of the conflict, but better said without the religious baggage.