A Defense of the Perverted Faculty Argument against Homosexual Sex

Heythrop Journal 56 (5):751-758 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Critics of homosexual activity often appeal to some form of natural law theory as a basis for their arguments. According to one version of natural law theory, actions that “pervert” or misuse a bodily faculty are immoral. In this paper, I argue that this “perverted faculty argument” provides a successful account of good and evil action. Several objections are assessed and found inadequate.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-25

Downloads
632 (#90,825)

6 months
56 (#155,973)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Tim Hsiao
University of Arkansas Grantham

Citations of this work

Sex and Sexuality.Raja Halwani - 2018 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Literatur.Christian Prust - 2022 - In Das neue Naturrecht und die Sexualethik. Baden-Baden: Verlag Karl Alber. pp. 425-444.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The elements of moral philosophy.James Rachels & Stuart Rachels - 2019 - New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education. Edited by James Rachels.
Natural Law and Natural Rights.John Finnis - 2011 - New York: Oxford University Press UK.
Good and Evil.Peter Geach - 1956 - Analysis 17 (2):33 - 42.
Real Essentialism.David S. Oderberg - 2007 - New York: Routledge.

View all 13 references / Add more references