h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

<>

I would say that extreme abstinence is usually, if not always, a compulsive/obsessive/addictive situation. It is certainly not a happy one.

az

Matholwch

I would not dispute that there is much that has been passed down to us by various writers, from the classical age and elswhere, but I would tend to treat all as sceptically as I treat the Roman accounts. My position is that all we know about the Celts comes from non celts or celts later converted to Christianity or integrated into Roman society. And of course archeology (My most trusted source) This is different from the histories we have of Egypt and Greece and even the Vikings, which 'come from their own hand'. In this situation the Celts are more vunerable than most to having our own wishes and ideals imposed on them retrospectively.

I find this difficult myself as my Mother was Welsh and my home town was reputedy an important Brigante Strong hold at about the time of the Roman invasion (Claudius's not Julius's). Although I would not put it in the same league as the Slave diaspora from africa in the 16th 17th and 18th centuries, I have some sense of being dissassociated from an important aspect of my cultural history. But am forced to recognise that aspects of that heritage live on in the Mabinogi and the arthurian legends.

The College of Bards is an interesting point, there seems to be some disagreement about their significance, My current understanding is that this was relatively minor since they quite quickly became integrated into christian theological frameworks particularly by the 7th 8th centuries, and much of the writing concerning them was reputedly either lost, rewritten by Christian propagandists or integrated into the writings of others, eg the venerable Bede, Geffory of Monmouth. Certainly the influence of the power brokers of the Roman church was such that by the 11th century they had almost total control over what was written and where what was written was kept about almost everything and anything.

Whilst their influence may well have been important I would be interested to hear what evidence there is for this.

Personally I give little credence to the writings of Romans, in whose interest it was to rubbish and demonize the barbarians of the north, nor to the Christian monks and scholars who later transcribed and interpreted these latin texts.

Im with you there Matholwch. It always depresses me when people call the actions of people who made human sacrifices, crusified people and kept slaves, as civilisation and their enemies barbarians

one love But many ways for me to spell your name

SD said "This links to the earlier theme of balance and to another issue of motivation, I belive our motives for behaving in a certain way are probably more important that the way we behave"

Hmmm - I'd have to think about this one. It seems to me, at first galnce, it depends upon the context. For example, as a manager, or if I function in the role of a mediator, motives are irrelevant: I must concentrate on behaviour and finding a means of obtaining an agreement or, as a manager, enforcing, appropriate behaviours to a situation. In those contexts, investigating motives is intrusive and inappropriate.

However, in other contexts - that of personal curiosity, therapy, counselling or psychology, motives become highly relevant. I would go further and say that childhood experiences become extremely relavnt, as these generally set the scene for later motivation, as you already alluded to when you mentioned e.g. Bowlby (and yes, I have read all three volumes of his work on 'attachment', and I may well not be the only person on this group to have done so). However, in the context of message boards, it may be possible, with circumspection, to query someone's motives, but it's generally a no-no to try to investigate their childhood experiences. Even if they are willing to engage on the issue, it usually bores the pants off everyone else.

"Many sex addicts do report that they continue to enjoy the sex they indulge in, howeve I am inclined not to believe this. Addiction implies a compulsion to continue to behave in a certain way, despite knowing that this is bad for you. I would argue the addict does not enjoy the activity rather the satiation of the addictive feelings which whilst a
subtle difference is an important one."

I agree there is a difference, but I feel it is rash to deny someone's reported feelings without more evidence. I may not mostly enjoy smoking but I cannot deny, even to myself, that the first cigarette of the day produces a physical reaction I find intensely pleasurable. Although it is common for many people to either lie to researchers about their reactions, or, even more commonly, to lie to themselves in order to deny the adverse side of certain behaviours, I do not yet know a means of differentiating between the lies and the truth. If you do please let me know, and I will sell it to researchers, the police and insurance companies at a vast profit.

Oh yes, and I am aware that the police and insurance companies are constantly developing means of languistic and other types of callibration and analysis which constantly improve their ability to distinguish between probably lies and probably truths, but we are still only in the realm of probability, not certainty. And the ability only works with conscious and not unconsious lies, so denial to oneself is beyond accurate callibration and still lies within the area of assumption by others.

"My comment on the isolating nature of abstinence was mainly directed at attempts at 'total' abstinence of aesthetics which by defenition is isolating, since it distances from all human contact, and many have found it difficult to even establish communication with another human being after years of isolation."

Then you are thinking of eremetics, not monks or nuns. Hmmm... I'm not challenging your statement as it appeals to me emotionally, but it would be useful to have some evidence. Any modern examples you can think of?

"It is impossible to know in an absolute sense what another person is thinking or feeling, ... as a result it is also impossible to know for certain if someone is lying or telling the truth, If some level of trust is present and is suported by some reasons for that trust to be given,
then a partner can be as certain as they can be that their relationship is exclusive."

Yes, of course they can believe. I have no quarrel with that. All I said was that the evidence points out that this is a matter of faith, not certainty. I choose to believe my partner will take health & safety precautions if he chooses to have sex with someone other than myself. But I don't fool myelf that there is no risk as a result, just that I am willing to take the gamble.

"One good way to know if you are able to trust someone is to know how trustworthy you are yourself, if you are able to be honest with yourself on this point then you stand a good chance of knowing if someone else is trustworthy."

I have to disagree. Even if we are entirely insightful about ourselves, we may be in denial about our partners. I have been there. As a professional vampire-slayer (interpretation: identifier of and dealer with borderline personalities causing industrial conflict) I still managed to trust the man I shared my life with at the time, and only spotted him as a very bad vampire too late.

"I give greater respect to early Greek writings that refer to the Druids as being the wisest people in the world at the time. Indeed, Pythagoras credits them with teaching him their sacred geometry, including Pi."

Um, Math, aren't the sources for this Hippolytus writing in the 2nd century (i.e. 800 years after Pythagoras) and Marcellinus in the 4th century, 1000 years after Pythagorus? Is there anything slightly more contemporary with Pythagorus?

So what does everyone think of the film that Mel Gibson produced?

Personally I view it as a form of learning entertainment that takes us on a journey into the past to share how the religion of Christianity came about - without preaching. I know that I could watch it and view another man's interpretation of events and actors interpretation of emotions and be subjective. I am not religious at all but I enjoy a good story, ok so those times were harsh and brutal, but well we can learn from that, that was then when actions were cruel and primitive and extremely basic. (We are still not that much different now, in some ways, just more technically advanced in cruelty!)

Or.... are you incensed that it graphically portrays cruelty by the Jews, as those feel that have demonstrated in concentration camp clothing outside the Premiere of the movie? I think that is a really bad case of over the top action - I mean concentration camp clothes, they are protesting in those? Ok, so they feel persecuted again, but what has that to do with Germany now, if I were a German I would be kinda upset by that.

I don't think that there is a part of the human race that hasn't performed some gross cruelty or other and I think the Jews are totally over-reacting, at least those demonstrating are.

Anyway thats enuff of my coffee morning ramble!

HS. May I please say what a well-researched and insightful post that was concerning 'sex addiction'.


I think there is a form of sex addiction that falls outside the normal range. This is the quite rare condition of nymphomania. I have met only one young woman who 'suffered' from this. She had little interest in relationships with the men she had sex with. Indeed, it would have been impossible to keep up with so many!

My own experience, I take to be within the normal range. I had a steady partner who wanted sex every day. I would stray for reasons I don't completely understand. The implied approval of sexual consent from pretty girls was very gratifying, but the underlying male tendency to get his genes into as many as possible of the next generation presumably took conscious effect in this particular form of gratification.

We don't know the age, experiences or social context of Lem. My nympho was sexually abused as a child, so aversion to sex isn't a necessary consequence of that. I guess that age and social context tend to work together. Where I live, there are many teenage girls pushing buggies round the shopping centre. In more middle class areas, this would probably not be the case.

toxx

"It always depresses me when people call the actions of people who made human sacrifices, crusified people and kept slaves, as civilisation and their enemies barbarians "

Of your list the only thing that celts have not been also accused of would be Crucifixion, in addition some writers have suggested that they engaged in child sacrifice as well. There is archeological evidence to support this. Slavery was a practice common of all the peoples of europe and probably the rest of the world well into the 13th and 14th centuries, when the name was changed to serfdom, the conditions remained remarkably similar however.

From my point of view Celts, Romans, Saxons, Greeks, Egyptians Vikings etc were all Civilisations, I am Just wary of romantacising any of them. (Woops unintentional pun) The noble greek Democracy for instance was great if you were a citizen, not so great for the other 80% of the population who were slaves and did not get to vote, and let's not forget the chattel status of women. (One area where the Celts score well compared to some anchient civilisations eg Boudica)

Heathen Sceptic, re bowlby You too?

Heathen Sceptic

I would never suggest that any statement made by me could be applied universally in all contexts to all humans at all times. I try to be careful in my language but at times may slip up and make generalisations which may not apply in specific circumstances.

I am sorry to hear of your betrayal.

You would not be able to sell it because I would before you.

I do not think it is possible to approach certanty and the leap of faith is probably more important than most of us realise. I think my reasoning concerning being honest with yourself stands up though. The proviso is that none of us is so competent that we cannot be hoodwinked, I have a recent experience in that area myself, though not a romantic one. But in retrospect if I had been more honest with myself about how the person concerned made me feel I may have seen the con comming earlier and have been able to do something about it.

There is now way to get it right all the time.

From the evidence promiscuity is often a reaction to sexual abuse, but I would tend to believe that it is one of the less healthy ones, the victim of the abuse feels used, and paradoxically becomes someone who uses others. Refering to the earlier conversation about balance this would seem to be a situation where the balance has been lost though I acknowledge that it might not be. Also abstinence might also be a step out of balance as well my main argument at that point was that it isnt necissarily so

Hmm, looking back at some of my earlier posts I think it is better I leave the question of sexual abstinance to more sensitive and experienced researchers. However, I am quite interested regarding food.

It has always been my position that my taste buds and other bodily reactions to food are adapted to encourage me to eat the right things at the right times. With the exception of foods that have addictive qualities to them (certain sugars and chocolate), I find it works very well for me to eat what I feel like eating when I feel like eating. I feel that austerity in this area would simply result in me depriving myself of nutrition.

"Heathen Sceptic, re bowlby You too?"

I took a rather meandering degree in fits and starts over 13 years. Given the life changes I went thorugh during the period, it's no wonder it didn't quite turn out as originally planned! And I occasionally added supernumery courses for the sake of personal completeness.

It's difficult to know what to call my degree. I suppose it would be PPD: psychology, politics and diversity. I actually intended to do politics and economics, but got distracted.

"But in retrospect if I had been more honest with myself about how the person concerned made me feel I may have seen the con comming earlier and have been able to do something about it."

Indeed. But sometimes silly feelings such as mere loyalty or compassion get in the way. Ho hum.

"From the evidence promiscuity is often a reaction to sexual abuse, but I would tend to believe that it is one of the less healthy ones"

I would agree. I have also seen celibacy used in the same way. As to health: it is often difficult for the abused to find a way to recognise or, once recognised, to express their rage in a way which enables this. From what I have seen, many (most? all?) forms of borderline personality disfunction also have their origins in childhood abuse, whether physical and/or emotional, as does psychosis in some people.

The interesting question is not that these effects are produced in so many people from this casue, but why some people, having suffered similar childhood adversity, do not have them, but manage to live, on average, balanced and healthy lives. Psychologists call this 'resiliance' and are beginning to grow increasingly interested in it.

'Nuns, virgins, and spinsters'. Rigoni-Stern and cervical cancer revisited:
quote;
"Present Department of Health policy regarding provision of cervical screening suggests that such screening is not necessary for 'nuns, virgins, and spinsters' (Warden 1990).

This policy is supported by the widely accepted view that cervical cancer is extremely rare among such women. Only if this view is correct is it reasonable to dispense with cervical screening in such women. If it were to be shown that such women had a lower, but still significant risk of cancer, then such an omission would he unreasonable."

Read the results @ http://www.obgyn.net/english/pubs/articles/nuns.htm


Alji

Heathen Sceptic

Resiliance: This might be a whole new thread all on its own, suffice to say it brings us back to Bowlby but in a modernised, or prehaps more accurately post-modernised form. Put Fonagy into google and see what comes up, 'someone able to think about the child's thoughts and feelings' not necissarily their caregiver. Among other things like intelligence and a structured but not confining environment. All fascinating stuff.

Query: This whole area wouldn't be your professional interest by any chance would it

Heathen Sceptic

Abuse + mental illness

Freud anoyed me on this one, he cme up with an abuse hypothysis to explain mental illness but withdrew it when the academic world threw it's hands up in horror at the idea. I still find myself being quite cross with him about this, prehaps hindsight is a wonderful thing but it seems rather self evident to me. He seemed mysoginistic and sexually obsessed to me anyway.

If he hadn't withdrawn the hypothysis, and had fought his corner I would have had more time for him and we might have made some useful headway in the treatment of mental illness.

N.b quickly add I dont think it explains all mental illness however.

Bouncybit...

Food seems to me like all the other possible addictions in the right situations for the right person with the right experiences its fine, but if things are out of kilter then I think eating what you want when you want it can be a disaster.

e.g. Two of the cats I own. One I acted as midwife for and watched grow from birth, Food has always been there 'on tap' so to speak, never gets fat, is a good hunter always active. The other adopted as a very sorry looking stray, thin as a rake, now two years on would be as round as a ball if I let her eat as much as she wanted, and curls up in front of the fire for most of the day and night, we had to start putting food down once a day much to the annoyance of the others to keep her weight in check.

Well yes certainly there are people who have eating problems, but I guess the point I was trying to make isn't at all about that. Its simply that things taste the way they do for a reason, physiological or psychological, and deliberately eating food that tastes bland or unpleasant probably means missing out on nutrition.