Worried that I'm sadistic

[A86]

Without emotions we'd have no society.

True.
I just don't like or understand the bad ones. So I hypothesise what it would be like without them.

 

[Flanscho]

True.
I just don't like or understand the bad ones. So I hypothesise what it would be like without them.

The question would then be what you consider to be a "bad emotion". I personallly don't think there are bad emotions as such, since they all have important functions. However, some peoples brains are somewhat triggerhappy in this manner. Like, for example, with choleric people, who have no or barely no control over their anger. You might think that anger can be a bad emotion, since it can lead to violence.
Now, on the other hand, imagine you were some medieval farmer in a remote region, and a bunch of bandits show up and devastate and rob your fields and crops and cattle and whatnot. Without anger, you'd mostly experience sadness. You'd sit there in apathy for a while, maybe try to rebuild something until the bandits show up again, and then you starve. "Normal" people would experience anger, if such wrong would be done to them. And said anger would mobilize them, give them energy, both for physical action to protect their properties or do something against the bandits or whatever. It enables you to be able to act and try to prevent the harm that was done to you to be inflicted to you again.
Now don't get me wrong, I don't say that anger is all awesome and we all should be angry at all times. It's just an example how an emotion some people might consider to be bad is actually there for a reason.

The problem is not with the emotions, that they are bad or wrong or anything. The problem is that some people experience the wrong emotions or experience them too intensely or whatnot.

 

[Alana.JPEG]

scantily clad women being humiliated.

isn't this like 99% of all porn?

 

[SotiCoto]

I may be depressed/anxious, but i'm still not misantropic. I don't hate or wish ill upon people. I never have. I've always found it kind of weird and remarkable that coming from an abusive household that pretty much held no empathy, I still managed to have it for other people. It doesn't always work out that way.

It most certainly doesn't "disable" me from anything. If anything it enables me to understand people to a depth a lot of people do not have. It is a doubled-edged sword -- you feel pain more deeply, but you also feel good emotions deeply, too. And i'd rather feel that way than not feel anything at all.

At least that way you know you're alive.

"Good emotions". Not an idea to which I subscribe.
Emotions are just a more primitive mode of situational judgement and reaction than rational thought. They both sit in the same niche, but the latter is a far more accurate gauge of the situation and appropriate counter-response than the former.

Just because someone don't use the same kind of reasoning as you, doesn't make them illogical. To me it's illogical for one to try to suppress their emotions. My reasoning is different from yours. Suppressing your emotions doesn't automatically make you more logical then people that don't. Especially if no one else in the world can find reason in your "logic" other then you. It seems to me that your just trying to rationalize your own bad, and self-destructive behavior. Trying to suppress your emotions instead of learning how to cope with them and express them appropriately is self-destructive. And trying to bring about suffering is terrible behavior.

What is and isn't rational isn't a matter of popular opinion. "Logical" is most assurely not a synonym for "good", nor open to vague reinterpretation, though the abuse of the language to such an extent is an inevitable outcome given time and entropy.
Afterall, if one is operating on the old Humpty Dumpty principle (referring to Alice Through the Looking Glass here) that a word means whatever you want it to mean, then communication is effectively impossible. To some extent that is exactly what several people here are demonstrating in practice.

To put it simply, if one is throwing around logical fallacies like confetti, then they are most assuredly being illogical by definition... and the folks here are throwing around no shortage of fallacies. Not least the old strawman approach.

And while mangling the emotions and stamping them down is certainly destructive, I wouldn't call it self-destructive... as the "self" I identify with does not include them. They're just redundant software that came with the body.

 

[planetweirdo]

What is and isn't rational isn't a matter of popular opinion. "Logical" is most assurely not a synonym for "good", nor open to vague reinterpretation, though the abuse of the language to such an extent is an inevitable outcome given time and entropy.

I didn't say that logic has a vague meaning or is a synonym for good. logic is reason. People with different minds and different personality's reason differently. This difference in reasoning results in people having different but still rational opinions. Just because someone's opinion differs from yours doesn't mean that they are being illogical. Logic is not defined as whatever SotiCoto think is right.

To put it simply, if one is throwing around logical fallacies like confetti, then they are most assuredly being illogical by definition... and the folks here are throwing around no shortage of fallacies. Not least the old strawman approach.

What makes you so sure that what you believe to be logical is not based on fallacy. Your own cognitive bias leads you to believe that you are always right and everyone who disagrees with you is always wrong. I believe that the belief that only people that suppress their emotions is capable of logic is a fallacy.

And while mangling the emotions and stamping them down is certainly destructive, I wouldn't call it self-destructive... as the "self" I identify with does not include them. They're just redundant software that came with the body.

Glad you admit that mangling emotions is destructive. When you mangle your own emotions is self-destructive. because you are doing it to yourself.

 

[theslowesthand]

I know I have OCD. But the thing is, these aren't intrusive thoughts. For some reason, in general, I enjoy these thoughts, but I know I shouldn't.

When I was posting this thread, I was thinking: maybe I should post this in the OCD forum, because it might be that. But now, I'm certain it CAN'T be just OCD. Like, if I enjoy these thoughts, it's not really OCD, right?

Maybe it's just plain obsession?

This is regarding whether sadistic urges/ways are just normal "sexual preferences": Although this is certainly not my "field" (being practically still virginal), I'll just throw this in here, as i happened to skim accross it in this "The ICD-10 Classification of Mental and Behavioural Disorders" that i downloaded the other day. It states under "F50-F59 Behavioural syndromes associated with physiological disturbances and physical factors" ... "F65 Disorders of sexual preference" ... "F65.0 Fetishism" & "F65.5 Sadomasochism" amongst others.
Such things may be quite common, or even regarded as "normal", i don't know, but the above does back up my view that they are not [entirely] healthy. But then society is not healthy, in fact a severely dysfunctional society is now sadly regarded as "normal".

 

[jaim38]

isn't this like 99% of all porn?

You're on to something. From what I hear, there's a lot of sadism in porn. Women acting like they're being forced to do things against their will. People derive pleasure from watching such porn. So, you're hardly the only person who's sadistic. In fact, I think many porn watchers are sadistic. To take it even further, society promotes sadism, with the media leading the way.