Emily Austin Seems To Think That Sex Is An Extravagant Pleasure aka natural but unnecessary. Do you agree?

I remember Hegel's quick run through Epicureanism.

In one of his lectures on the history of philosophy he interprets the natural but not necessary category of Epicurus as simply dealing with sexual desire and forgets about what I (and Diogenes in his scholion, probably) would define instead: The amplification and variation of a necessary need. For example, tasty drinks instead of water or especial sexual experiences instead of simple ways of getting satisfaction.

I also know that in law it is called proportionality. It means to look whether something is adequate in comparison to another good or more simple: The pleasure-pain calculus.

Apart from that, the introductory post made me laugh, because I always hear the opposite about Asia, especially the Eastern part.

On the notion that sex carries no benefits

++++++++++++++++++++

Dr. Austin quotes Vatican Saying 51:

“I hear from you that the movement of your flesh is abundantly disposed toward sexual intercourse. As long as you do not break the laws or disturb noble and settled customs or vex any of your neighbors or wear out your body or use up the things necessary for life, indulge yourself in any way you prefer. However, it is impossible not be constrained by some one of these things. For sex never profits, and one must be content if it does not harm.” [Translation by Kelly E. Arenson in Austin, Emily A.. Living for Pleasure: An Epicurean Guide to Life (Guides to the Good Life) (p. 175). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.]

Two possible translations from Diogenes Laertius

In the below-cited paper, the author examines two translations of Diogenes Laertius 10.118 on the subject:

“In D.L. 10.118 we read: [Greek text would not copy-paste] There is also a version of this text in the Vatican Sayings (VS 51), differing only by the omission of the Kai. Translators have traditionally rendered the version with Kai along the lines of: They say that sex is never beneficial, and you are very lucky (or, "it is surprising," or "it is marvelous") if it does not do harm as well.”

And an alternative by Jeffrey Purington: “[They] say that sex never benefits, but it is desirable, provided that it does not harm.”

After examining other texts, the author concludes: “Until very weighty evidence is brought forward to the contrary, it seems to me that we should feel confident that the traditional translation is the right one: sex is never beneficial, and you are lucky if it doesn't actually harm you-by implication, it usually does.”

https://philarchive.org/archive/BREEOS

+++++++++++++++++++

Now we know that sex does carry positive health benefits, provided it is enacted in ways that also cause no harm. So the claim that sex is never beneficial is just wrong. I tried to do some research on what ancient physicians thought about the benefits/dangers of sex, and found little – most resources dealt with gender roles (with the strong androcentric biases that were prevalent) and what ancient physicians thought about the differences between male and female bodies (and procreation). The following sparse quotes might be indicative (and I vouch not at all for the sources):

“The ancient Greek physicians have not failed in their studies to indicate the beneficial role of sexual activity in human health. They acknowledged that sex helps to maintain mental balance. Very interesting is their observation that sex may help mental patients to recover. Nevertheless they stressed emphatically that sex is beneficial only when there is a measure in it, so they believed that sexual abstinence or excessive sexual activity affect negatively the mental and physical health of man. … Therefore they believed that the loss and the exchange of bodily fluids during sex help body's humors to maintain their equilibrium which in turn will form the basis for the physical and mental health.” [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26480224/]

“People who worked as doctors in Ancient Greece suggested sex as a way to combat diseases such as: depression, dyspepsia, icterus, lower back pain, weak vision etc. Hippocrates, the father of Western medicine, supported that unrestrained intercourse could cure dysentery.” [https://greekreporter.com/2013/11/16/sex…ancient-greeks/]

A bit later:

“Galen knew that sex, perhaps even more than bathing, was pleasurable, but he argued that balance was necessary with this activity too. He believed that sexual release was healthful (and the retention of semen deleterious), and that intercourse was necessary for the continuity of humanity. However, he also warned that it was bestial to be preoccupied by sex.” [https://exploregalen.com/project/activity]

++++++++++++++++++++

The above is not much, I know – but my eyes were starting to cross.

Quote from Pacatus

Hippocrates, the father of Western medicine, supported that unrestrained intercourse could cure dysentery.”

That one's news to me!

I've been taking a qigong course this year. At one point, in answer to somebody's query, the instructor posted a chart with guidelines for sexual release. I don't remember the details; something like every day when in one's 20s, every thirty days after one turns 60 (don't quote me on those!), and a sliding scale in the decades between.Apparently one or more students had been instructed by others to retain their semen and were having various ailments. So, at least for some schools of Chinese medicine, sex is considered to be healthy. (I personally don't have much understanding of Chinese medicine: just passing along an anecdote.)

I would like to give my thoughts on the subject of the necessity of sex as this has been a topic of major interest, experimentation and research for the past 6 years for me.

I actually would provide an alternate viewpoint:

The removal of the desire for sex is very difficult (for many reasons) and there often exist withdrawal symptoms from quitting - thus making getting rid of the desire painful. These withdrawal pains need to be endured for a long time (your mileage may vary) until they go away. Yet, once the withdrawals are over, the desire for sex gets weaker and people report that they experience long-term benefits such as more enjoyment from other things, increased mental/physical fortitude and most importantly, their lives become more pleasurable (I've been there many times). I am talking about brain/body alterations here, not simply about the pleasure coming indirectly from having more time for other things though those are also significant (but a bit too obvious to mention).

Essentially, a great pain is endured for an even greater long-term pleasure.

Another reason I believe sex to be divisive is that sex (particularly the release) is also a potent physical pain killer and stress reliever. I personally experience the pain-killing effects for up to two weeks after release. Many people deal with bodily pain daily and having sex can be an effective way to deal with that. On the other hand, if you are aware of your pain, you can maybe figure out the underlying issues better.

However, if you can manage your pain without sex, I think abstinence is worth experimenting on.

Warning: Sometimes the pleasure get's too high and things get a little psychotic. The Epicurean should be prepared and watch out for this and manage this properly to keep their peace of mind.

I think I'll stop here for now. Hope this brings up some good discussion or is useful to someone

Quote from Eric

Warning: Sometimes the pleasure get's too high and things get a little psychotic. The Epicurean should be prepared and watch out for this and manage this properly to keep their peace of mind.

Yes I've always thought that the major reason for Epicurus' concern was the damaging things that might result from doing things without thinking about the results, much as with alcohol or other drugs.

"Yet, once the withdrawals are over, the desire for sex gets weaker and people report that they experience long-term benefits such as more enjoyment from other things, increased mental/physical fortitude and most importantly, their lives become more pleasurable (I've been there many times)."

- In that context I would also think that "age" is a big factor to consider. All sorts of changes take place with age.

Here is a fun article which recommends "quality over quantity":

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psymon…really-have-sex?

And here is one on voluntary celibacy:

Is Voluntary Celibacy on the Rise?

How common is it for people to take a break from sex and dating? Why do so many people today seem to be doing it? And are they happy with their decision to…

www.psychologytoday.com

I personally would use the phrase "natural but unnecessary" (rather than "extravagant pleasure") and what falls into that category depends on the given situation - and every situation is unique depending on the circumstances - so I wouldn't assign sex as being "natural and unnecessary" all across the board. I would label something as unnecessary if only if it causes (or results in) pain or disturbance, or it is very difficult to aquire -- and this would reflect an Epicurean method of "choice and avoidance".

Quote from Cassius

Quote from Eric

Warning: Sometimes the pleasure get's too high and things get a little psychotic. The Epicurean should be prepared and watch out for this and manage this properly to keep their peace of mind.

Yes I've always thought that the major reason for Epicurus' concern was the damaging things that might result from doing things without thinking about the results, much as with alcohol or other drugs.

I suspect that you may have misunderstood what I was saying, so I will clarify. I think I worded what I said poorly. I meant that the differing neurotransmitter/hormonal states (that produce pleasure and joy) received from abstaining from sex and lust, can get too high and cause psychotic symptoms (bliss, overconfidence, mania/hypomania) which often precede doing things without thinking about the results (and can muddle thinking in general).

Such examples can be seen in these significant books referenced in the celibate/anti-sex communities:

Bliss of the Celibate - By Julian Lee

The Coiled Serpent: A philosophy of Conservation and Transmutation of Reproductive Energy - By C.J Van Vliet

What I see in these books and their authors, is an emphasis of extreme bliss or joy (pleasure) and vigor but I can also see significant delusional and magical thinking. Particularly combined with significant amount of meditation and other spiritual practice (as a method of obtaining self-control), abstinence seems to produce this kind of long-term state of mind.

The latter book, Coiled Serpent, although in my opinion false and kind of repulsive to read, is interesting in the sense, that it contains quotes from philosophers from all cultures throughout time - including Greek and Roman philosophers (including Epicurus - however, no new quotes). Though physicians seemed to value sex for medicinal reasons as stated in the post by Pacatus, there were philosophers close to Epicurus' time who said it is harmful and may have influenced him. Such as

"Of sexual indulgence Pythagoras said that "it is always
harmful and not conducive to health."14 "And once when
he was asked when one might indulge in sex he replied,
'whenever you want to be weaker than yourself'."

and

[Section on Aristotle] "sexual intercourse involves
the destruction of our bodies, the shortening of life."

Though he came after Epicurus,

"Cicero, the eclectic, "culled from every accessible phi
losophy those elements which were regarded as most help
ful for the higher life."" He found that "nothing is more
hostile to this . . . than sensual pleasure."48 "Such plea
sure . . . extinguishes completely the light of the soul."

Also in DeWitt's book, he mentions that Augustine of Hippo (a Catholic) approved of Epicurus apart from his denial of god.

My purpose in my writing is to bring attention to the joy and bliss that abstinence can bring for some people, yet being mindful that this is but a consequence of neurochemical/hormonal changes - not some supernatural gift; and that measures should be taken practicing this to avoid delusions.

Quote from Cassius

- In that context I would also think that "age" is a big factor to consider. All sorts of changes take place with age.

I'm sure that's true. Could you elaborate what you mean?

Quote from Eric

I'm sure that's true. Could you elaborate what you mean?

Well mostly what I was referring to is just the way people typically "slow down" or develop chonic disease conditions with age. I'm personally at the point now (over 60!) that I just don't have the energy to do the things I used to do in whole range of areas. That makes diet and exercise even more important over time, I guess!

Quote from Eoghan Gardiner

I don't know, as a teenager I was told sex is this amazing thing. Yes it's very pleasurable but it's never as good as the desire and sex drive make it out to be. In a lot of ways, it's very disappointing.

Yeah, I can relate to that. The drive is stronger than the actual pleasure. Seems that regarding sex, we are wired to seek and want it more than be satisfied by it.

Quote from Eoghan Gardiner

This is in no way a recommendation of continence. As Cassius said, a 18 year old is going to have a very different experience of sex and sex drive then a 30 year old (me) or 60+(Cassius) etc.

Makes sense. I still feel the same drive and enthusiasm as I did when I was 18 or younger, but I have ADHD (diagnosed as a child), so that surely explains why. Sometimes I wish age would tone it down a little, but I have my methods

Quote from Eric

The drive is stronger than the actual pleasure. Seems that regarding sex, we are wired to seek and want it more than be satisfied by it.

This perhaps depends on one's attitude and practice with regard to observing sensory experience.

A comparison can be made to eating food. There is hunger, but if the food is eaten too quickly then that can result in less satisfaction. If the meal is carefully planned and savored, and eaten slowly with an attitude of observation of every sensation, then that can result in greater satisfaction.

Quote from Kalosyni

Quote from Eric

The drive is stronger than the actual pleasure. Seems that regarding sex, we are wired to seek and want it more than be satisfied by it.

This perhaps depends on one's attitude and practice with regard to observing sensory experience.

A comparison can be made to eating food. There is hunger, but if the food is eaten too quickly then that can result in less satisfaction. If the meal is carefully planned and savored, and eaten slowly with an attitude of observation of every sensation, then that can result in greater satisfaction.

Yes I agree a 100 %. Slowing down and being present during sex does in my experience increase the pleasure and satisfaction. However, this is not common practice most likely because of the unfortunate limitation that sustaining presence, being more sensitive and being able to slow down without massive amounts of control (which is not relaxing), for many, require effort and structuring one's life in such a way that one is mostly not overstimulated by life and/or stuck thinking all the time. Sometimes we are simply too busy because of our life situation/choices to sufficiently de-stimulate, and regain sensitivity and presence. Practice of course plays a part.

What I was talking about was the common experience of just doing what the lusts drive us to do and that is where sex is often disappointing or becomes disappointing over time (your mileage may vary on how fast). Tantra/Karezza are in my mind advanced practices and I personally am kind of on the fence on whether these practices are what I should do compared to just abstinence. I know from experience that I definitely need to de-stimulate (meditate/sensory deprive myself) a lot and avoid other worldly stimulation to be able to satisfactorily enjoy these. If I worked full time instead of part-time at my brainy job, I personally would have a very difficult time making this happen.

Still experimenting with these with my girlfriend. We both agree on the above and we do have satisfying experiences when I succeed in keeping myself present and not overstimulated.

What I have been having at the back of my mind is since, for me, making sex worth it takes so much resources and often in practise sacrifices from and distracts me from securing the fulfillment of more important desires, it might be better to be abstinent.

Or maybe I just need to try harder

Quote from Eric

since, for me, making sex worth

I think that's always the framework. People are different and always at different points in their lives and have different priorities. The best choices are always a matter of evaluating your own personal circumstances.