Whatever that effect is, it's nothing like the effects that exist from sex. It's like comparing the line that monkeys may draw, with the art that the ...
I have empirical evidence supporting my interpretation, not from that study, but from the others. There's also life experiences, knowledge and underst...
Yes, that is MY UNDERSTANDING of it, not what the study claims... It's getting quite tiring that you fail to see this. Just because it's my understand...
Some of them have, not all of them. And no, it doesn't necessarily mean they're more knowledeable than me - just because they have a diploma in that, ...
I would agree with whatever floats your boat from a pragmatic point of view (in the sense that you can't convince everyone), however, the two cannot l...
Are you purposefully misreading the studies? >:O One of them claimed that there was no empirical evidence that casual sex caused negative psychologica...
No I don't dismiss evidence, I dismiss your interpretation of it. The World Trade center fell after a plane hit it. That's our evidence. You say it fe...
Yes, I've looked at the wiki, stop giving it to be 10 times. That's just examples of very small movements of people. Certainly sex does not influence ...
Really? But this "evidence" may be there given both statements. If casual sex always has negative psychological consequences, it doesn't follow that o...
I agree sex isn't always a bad thing in terms of psychological effects. I don't take the hardcore Epicurean position that the Sage will never engage i...
Perceived psychological benefits exist in cultures which are liberal towards sex - just as psychological harm as a result of it exists in cultures whi...
No I obviously don't believe just that it might be mistaken, I have reasons to think it is mistaken. But with regards to where you are, it is first im...
I mean to say that some people - Epicurus for one - found that the sage should abstain from sex, as it leads to potentially damaging emotions more fre...
No the evidence isn't mistaken. The evidence is what it is. The explanation of the evidence is mistaken - the mechanism by which such evidence occurs ...
No that doesn't show it is wrong, but it shows that it is possible to condemn casual sex on psychological grounds - contrary to what you claimed the e...
If there are no negative psychological consequences perceiveable right now, does that mean there won't be any, or there aren't in fact any? That's wha...
Just because the participants have not seen that they are wrong at point X, doesn't mean they aren't going to see this later, or that they aren't wron...
No because it still remains a fair point. They can't argue they had promiscuous sex in order to gain such an understanding. However, they can argue th...
Indeed, which shows my point - culture determines the attitudes that most people have towards sex. It's not biological in other words. Having said thi...
Thanks. That's why in a movie I saw recently (one of the rare few), Brad Pitt has sex with some girl (forgot the names) because they were about to die...
Sure, so long as you follow Seneca's dictum: "enjoy present pleasures in such a way as not to injure future ones" :) And this applies both along the E...
Yes except that it wasn't a mistake. My argument isn't that it's good to have a single partner because it's natural to want to be special to one perso...
Not true again. Their conception isn't very clear - they don't have very clear reasons why promiscuity is wrong apart from saying that people must get...
Yes but I can discuss with you in terms of the psychological - as the mystical is intimately related with the psychological anyway - it's a step beyon...
Nope. I merely identify that it exists, naturally and by itself - as opposed to artifically. I don't discuss whether it's good to have it or not. But ...
No it is possible, but as you say it is temporary, and hence it is a "broken bond" - as in always already broken. Well they are insignificant and poin...
You on the other hand m-theory, you sit there with what everyone else is thinking. That in itself should have you worried - that everyone else is thin...
Yeah, pity that I arrived at this "ideology" independently through my own thinking - an ideology which is opposed by my Western culture, and which I p...
Well they could explore the negative aspects of it, that's for sure >:O As for what the spiritual dimension is, it's the bond (or in the case of one-n...
No it's really what you THINK you're body has been telling you. I used to think the same when I was a teenager. I was wrong. Our culture has deceived ...
No you must simply take heed of what your culture is telling you "have sex have sex have sex" without understanding the spiritual dimension that's alw...
Yes, for materialist hedonists who believe that sex is God, yes it's not that special, because they never see the spiritual dimension of it. That's ob...
No, it doesn't necessarily make it more special. Ehmmm did I ever say they can't? No, not automatically. It's not a sufficient condition for that. Wel...
Now the fact that someone has had sex before isn't such a big deal in itself. It's more about how they've had sex. For example, it's more important th...
Not at all. It's a natural desire of the human being, which has nothing to do with insecurity. The desire for specialness with your partner is a desir...
*facepalm* - yes it would be better to get married at 15 and have as much sex as you want, then to get married at 30, and until then engage in promisc...
Yes which is unfortunate that we're not as uptight as other cultures. They have a little bit more reason left in them compared to us. Their mere curio...
Comments