Philosophical Quarterly 60 (241):808-830 (2010)
|Abstract||Why has little progress been made in resolving the debate about the concept of sexual perversion? I suggest that the stalemate is due to misunderstandings and poor methodology. I develop a new methodology for resolving disputes about the correct analysis of the contents of concepts where the disputes have social and political ramifications. When deciding between competing analyses of a concept, we should not just consider facts about our inferential and judgemental dispositions with respect to that concept; we should also incorporate facts about its desired social function. This provides additional resources for making decisions about which analysis to choose, when information about our dispositions alone cannot determine an answer|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Igor Primoratz (1997). Sexual Perversion. American Philosophical Quarterly 34 (2):245 - 258.
Robert Gray (1978). Sex and Sexual Perversion. Journal of Philosophy 75 (4):189-199.
Alan Soble (2003). Kant and Sexual Perversion. The Monist 86 (1):55-89.
Thomas Nagel (1969). Sexual Perversion. Journal of Philosophy 66 (1):5-17.
Linda Martín Alcoff (2009). Discourses of Sexual Violence in a Global Framework. Philosophical Topics 37 (2):123-139.
Helen Gavin & Jacqi Bent, Sexual Deviancy and the Sex Police: An Examination of the Religious, Cultural and Psycho-Legal Antecedents of Perceived Perversion.
Francis Williamson (2004). Sex, Disorder and Perversion. Philosophical Papers 33 (2):203-229.
James M. Humber (1987). Sexual Perversion and Human Nature. Philosophy Research Archives 13:331-350.
Added to index2009-11-17
Total downloads114 ( #5,994 of 722,752 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #20,344 of 722,752 )
How can I increase my downloads?