Philosophy Research Archives 13:331-350 (1987)
In this essay I examine seven of the best-known attempts to define ‘sexual perversion’. I argue that if these definitions are meant to prescribe our use of ‘sexual perversion’, the definitions are really theoretical definitions, and none can be accepted because the arguments offered in support of the definitions are either incomplete or misdirected. Next, I argue that it is not possible to formulate a definition of ‘sexual perversion’ which captures our ordinary use of the term because common usage indicates that ‘sexual perversion’ is a cluster term. Finally, I consider whether it is possible to develop and defend a theoretical definition of ‘sexual perversion’. I argue that to succeed in this task one must first demonstrate that a particular theory of human nature is true, and that this cannot be done because human nature is an essentially contested concept
|Keywords||Contemporary Philosophy History of Philosophy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Sexual Deviancy and the Sex Police: An Examination of the Religious, Cultural and Psycho-Legal Antecedents of Perceived Perversion.Helen Gavin & Jacqi Bent - unknown
On the Concept of Sexual Perversion.Kristie Miller - 2010 - Philosophical Quarterly 60 (241):808-830.
Social Constructionism and Sexual Desire.James Giles - 2006 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 36 (3):225–238.
Transsexualität Zwischen Genetik Und Sozialer Praxis.Yiftach J. H. Fehige - 2009 - Deutsche Zeitschrift für Philosophie 57 (5):757-780.
Added to index2011-12-02
Total downloads50 ( #101,933 of 2,154,090 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #184,428 of 2,154,090 )
How can I increase my downloads?