Now-a-days a new concept is taking shape among academicians. Being a celibacy can fulfill your longterm goals or mission in life through self-actualization. How many of you are ready to celibate for a noble cause?
Dr. N Owen?
A Dr. and ya can't handle the English language?
My goodness that was a gross misuse of English grammar!
"...Being a celibacy can fulfill your longterm goals..."
"How many of you are ready to celibate..."
Whew! and you being a DR.? ...Of what?
Yer kidding of course?
Or maybe I got something wrong in grade school grammar? Do ya think?...:
Pls...I've got broad shoulders, correct me if I'm wrong...:
I have an interest in self actualisation, and feel confident in saying many others here do as well.
I have not heard of a theory that supports practising celibacy to gain self actualisation.
Could you provide a reading source?
Self-actualisation sounds very mysterious. Do you mean that celibacy helps towards self-realisation? I think it can yes. Sex can get in the way of things and takes up a lot of time, not just in the doing (cos that just a small part of it) but in the thinking about, and the planning and the anxiety of waiting. Are there many great academics who also have a track record like Peter Stringfellow? I'm genuinely curious.
I think men find it harder to think straight when they're in a relationship. Some men go off and become hermits so that they can think really really hard.
Apparently men reach their peak of achievement before marriage, and its downhill after that.
Perhaps this says more about men and their inability to think of more than one thing at once....eh fellas?
Just because he's a doctor doesn't mean English is his native language.
I'm already my own actual self so I fail to see how celibacy or the lack thereof (how do you like that for a language twist?) would have any impact.
Maybe he should leave the Dr. off before his name ...or...make us aware that English is not his native language...If that's the case, I'd apologize and ask him to re-construct his sentence and broaden the scope of his meaning.
I'm a fair guy! :
No no, I'm a woman with French origin. But I fail to understand what Mr. Qwark is talking about... read this as: "Being a celibacy" can fulfill your longterm goals or mission in life through self-actualization.
"How many of you are ready to celibate", perfect grammar. I don't think you guys are kidding with me!
Okay, SHE'S a doctor - I wondered about that but the surname is male so I just let it go.
Not a native English speaker, that was obvious, not a problem.
"Being a celibacy" is incorrect; celibacy is the act of refraining from sex, a person is not an act.
"How many of you are ready to celibate" is incorrect because it needs "to BE celibate". Celibate is not a verb even though it ends with "-ate".
Your Engish is atrocious DR., but since it isn't your native language I apologize for beating ya up!
Now, expand on the intent of your thread question pls.
What, exactly, is it you are trying to get us to respond to.
Sorry for my poor English! I really didn't know celibate is not a verb, but celibacy? Anyway, I really deserve that kind of welcome... for my poor English. I'm a woman... but how will I prove it here... forgive me... I'm not comfortable with such arrogant atmosphere (again poor language)... bye!
Golly Dr.....ya left and didn't even accept my heartfelt apology!
Tsk, tsk...... :
C'mon back! WE don't care what your gender is! Now that we know that English is not your native language, we will understand and work with ya.
Now, accpet my apology and git yer sensitive butt back here and chat with us.
Sorry your feelings were hurt!
c'mon, c'mon...we love ya...:
I hope you will reconsider and participate more in the forums. I think this was mostly a misunderstanding. Many of the people here are quite polite.
I think and hope that most of the people would be quite polite here, except some bad boys and girls… (but they’re everywhere, and exception proves the rule, so it’s ok).
Self-actualization: The process of attaining the highest level of satisfaction with a proper mission in life through work generally for the wellbeing of the society (not for one’s personal position or wealth etc.) and this certainly calls for an ego-less behaviour (self-esteem and ego are different and one should not be confused, self-esteem is a positive energy while ego is just opposite, a separate discussion thread could be opened to discover the truth and myth about the two).
Celibacy: It grossly means not to involve in sexual practices for some days to some months or years or forever. It will reduce the male reproductive hormone production (testosterone) both in male and female and thereby help reducing their ego.
The process leading to self-actualization is very difficult for most of us, yet some of us select this road sometimes in life for some reason or the other!
Thank you all so much!
I'm sure there is a wonderful question of great meaning here, and that it is probably my fault that I can't understand what it is.
No, no, we're not being mean! Well, some of us aren't. And qwark really is asking you to explain a little more so we can respond properly.
I'm a woman, too.
To be celibate (uses a 'state-of-being' verb)
To practice celibacy
A life of celibacy
What exactly is "self-actualization"? And are you suggesting that not being sidetracked by sex will give you more opportunity to concentrate on self-improvement and achieving goals?
I don't think that would work so well for many men, the biological urge is often too strong.
Dr.N., I'm sorry that you found this atmosphere to be arrogant, but please consider it from a different viewpoint. First, in your username you have used the honorific that indicates a highly educated, intelligent person; and you have used a surname (actually Welsh in origin) that is strongly associated with English-speaking peoples. So, a legitimate first assumption could be that you are announcing to everyone that English is your first language and that you are highly educated - based on your username.
But in addition to that, you have opened a thread and chosen the topic for it. Would it not also be a reasonable assumption that a highly educated person would use vocabulary that is familiar to them, particularly if they are the one who selected the topic?
And, finally, in the thread title, you used the word "celibacy" correctly. That makes it all the more surprising that you say you did not know that celibacy is an act, not a person.
Forgive me, but I don't believe the arrogance is one-sided here.
EDIT: While I was typing this, TLM and qwark posted much more kindly than my post sounds, even though mine was kindly meant. I think I'll bow out as quickly as I butted in.
What academicians? I mean, name three at a accredited universities that say this. Seriously.
Personally, I don't think 'self-actualization" implies a non-sexual. One's best and most highly developed self can be sexual.
I understand the question despite the errors in it. However, how can a person find the concept of self-actualization if they take themselves out of a normal life? There is a whole wealth of experience to be missed if you have to live it without your children. If single life was the way for you, there's still a wealth of experience to have enjoying physical love and connecting with another human being. How can depriving one's self of something that leads to love be a way to self actualization? I think that experiencing love is so important to becoming your best self it doesn't quite make sense to pursue celibacy for self actualization.
However, I understand that many religious peoples go that route. Maybe it depends on what's more selfless for the individual, the down to earth approach, love and marriage, or the more spiritual route that leaves your head in the clouds. Jesus chose to come down to earth and live amoung us. I've also heard the saying "Too spiritual for any earthly good."
How can self actualization not be part of the religious experience? You would have to consider self actualization both religious and non religious.
Um, if a person is not religious, their actualization will not be religious. Unless you think the person can only be the best version of them self by becoming someone else or conforming to cultural norms. Which is not really what Maslow, Rogers et al had in mind when they developed the theory. At no point did the say either atheism or sex were contrary to full self actualization. Nor do I know of any academic position to suggest this since.
Okay, first of all, celibacy refers to the state of being unmarried. Chastity is the word used to mean non-participation in sexual activity. That's according to my print OED and my print American Heritage. So I think you mean chastity rather than celibacy, a misuse that most native speakers practice, but that doesn't make it correct.
As for celibacy and self-actualization, that has been my experience. I had to get a divorce to pursue my career. I have not married since, and my career (which I love) is progressing just fine, thank you. I am sure that being married would put a damper in my desire to fulfill myself in my career. (Six moves across the Atlantic in seven years doesn't really lend itself to a stable home life.)
Do those two dictionaries not also give the additional meaning of "abstaining from sexual relations"? Mine does; but then, mine is not the OED.
OED and American Heritage both make the distinctions. That is why, for example, Roman Catholic priests lose their priesthood if they marry (because they take a vow of celibacy), but they go to confession and do penance if they violate the rule of chastity. Admittedly, this distinction may not be of much use any longer except the the Roman Catholic priesthood and language purists.
By modern received and dictionary meaning celibacy and chastity mean not having sex.
Chastity and celibacy
There is a difference between chastity and celibacy. Celibacy is the state of not being married, so a promise of celibacy is a promise not to enter into marriage but instead to consecrate one's life to service (in other words, "married to God"). Chastity, a virtue expected of all Christians, is the state of sexual purity; for a vowed celibate, or for the single person, chastity means the avoidance of sex. For the married person, chastity means the practice of sex only within marriage between a man and woman, and can carry the expectation of intercourse with the spouse that is open to conception.
Celibacy is the male counterpart to female virginity, implying that the celibate was not only not married, but that he had never been married.
I would not have thought to use Wikipedia as an authoritative source, but since you did:
"Celibacy refers to a state of being unmarried, or a state of abstention from sexual intercourse or the abstention by vow from marriage."
and further down on the same page:
"Celibacy is viewed differently by the Catholic Church and the various Protestant communities. It includes clerical celibacy, celibacy of the consecrated life, voluntary lay celibacy, and celibacy outside of marriage." (emphases mine)
How can the Wikipedia contributor speak of "celibacy outside of marriage," if the only definition of celibacy is "the state of being unmarried"?
I will not give my usual spiel on the way words change, develop, shift in meaning, and denote (and connote) multiple meanings - even simultaneously - throughout their life spans... because I know that you already know it is true.
By the way, I am not Roman Catholic, so their definitions do not concern me, as a general rule. They are entitled to use certain words as technical terms within their own world, just as they use "confession" to mean something different from what the rest of the world (the legal profession, for example) means when we/they use the word.
"I will not give my usual spiel on the way words change, develop, shift in meaning, and denote (and connote) multiple meanings - even simultaneously - throughout their life spans... because I know that you already know it is true."
Of course it's true. I'm entitled to my opinion that the distinction is necessary and valid, and I'm also entitled to my opinion that the direction the English language is heading, as a whole, it not a good thing. You'd say something to one of your friends if you thought she or he was making a serious mistake,, wouldn't you? The English language is one of my best friends, and I feel obligated to point out her mistakes to her. This blurring of distinctions is a huge mistake, sweetie. (That last sentence was directed at the English language, not at you or any person on the HP forum. I anthropomorphize? Very well, I anthropomorphize, with apologies to Walt Whitman.)
Quite right that you are entitled to your opinion. And in addition to the ethical legitimacy of differences, differing opinions are among the charms of human social interactions. (My opinion )
No argument from me either about the importance of distinctions appropriate to the context in which they are used. In this specific instance, our disagreement would be whether the distinction that is so important to you is appropriate in this context. My opinion is that it is not. You and I are both entitled to our differing opinions on the matter.
Which English? --
Thomas Jefferson's? Shakespeare's? Chaucer's? Bede's?
And which direction? --
The direction of absorbing words from practically every culture it touches - words like carol, tambourine, ukulele, tango, banjo, fife, mazurka, guitar, maraca?
The direction of changing grammar - from, for example, Thou wouldest to You'd? from if you snooze, then you will lose to you snooze, you lose?
The direction of changing the meaning of existing words - such as, for example, the words that make up your username and mine?
There is plenty occurring in English that saddens me too, although I realize that in language (especially in English) change is a constant. The specifics of what bothers me differ from the specifics of what bothers you.
How do you cope with words like wake, punt, key, and bridge?
Another important question would be: Which authority do we accept as the one that accurately describes the English-that-is? And is there only one authority? Is there only one English-that-is?
Why would it be?
Sex is the most natural thing I can think of.
No one is responsible for my "self actualization" but me.
Sex kept me "stable" and my testosterone levels at a level I could control and that kept me focused.
I've never considered celibacy. Never wanted to be a priest either.
at some stage of eduction we were taught that for the human species to survive we need only 3 things-food, shelter, sex. when we repress what "needs" or is naturally expressed, "it" will come out in other methods. using the term "noble" with the illusion of actualization is your personal take on your choice. as a human, you ARE already noble in ways and actualized.
it is typical for highly religious persons to experience sexual repression in the form of "holiness".
Everyone experiences sexual repression to some extant. I would think some of it would be necessary.
it what it is in the end-likely balanced on a wide/total scale-there are many who do not repress it at all, others on the other end of that scale-most towards the middle. since energy and matter cannot be either created nor destroyed, only transformed-all there is, is transformation. your personal feelings of neccessity is your choice, which is totally yours for you-again, you cannot mess it up! you are "doing you perfectly".
by Justin Earick4 years ago
Sodom wasn't smited for homosexuality (false-idol worship, poor treatment of strangers and the poor, gang rape). Leviticus doesn't matter (old covenant, pork, lobster, tattoos, mixed fibers, period sex,...
by Jim Higgins4 years ago
It is one thing to hit a double letter (or to skip and "e" like I almost did in letter, but if English is your native language, it seems to me that you should make an effort to spell correctly and use standard...
by cloudy_cool6 years ago
This game's simple too!Just share any word from your native language other than English and also type the meaning for us to understand (in English)I'll start...samundar (hindi) sea
by Jeff Berndt6 years ago
Here's a question for all you bilingual or multi-lingual people out there:Has learning a second or third language changed the way you think about the world in general?I can speak a smattering of a couple languages other...
by pamij3 years ago
Should men of the cloth be held to higher standards than the flock that they lead or are they merely mortals and are subjected to sin as the rest of humanity? If so should society readily forgive them as Christ...
by faithnate126 years ago
when we talk about faith, we are driving at someone who is reliance. reliance is one who is confidence trust hope reliable with anything, people as well. what is faith by the way? an evidence of substance of things hope...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.