S
spencelo
Guest
But if procreation is “absolutely impossible” for her, how can the act be “ordered towards procreation?”
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
stewstew03
Guest
I think we’re not doing a very good job of explaining “objectively procreative.” Let’s go back to the blind man analogy.This doesn’t explain why it’s accurate to characterize penis-vagina sex between **permanently **sterile couples as “objectively procreative,” as opposed to “objectively nonprocreative.”
All eyes are ordered toward vision - they are “objectively perceptive.” A child born with a lack of visual perception is blind, thus unable to have perceptive vision. This does not mean, however, that eyeballs lose their primary function. It does mean that his eyes, though they are objectively perceptive, cannot fulfill their essential purpose. Again, the presence of blindness doesn’t change the fact that the essential purpose of eyeballs are to see the world in which we live.
In the same way, the essential purpose of the male organ is to procreate. A sterile male organ (a blind one-eyed Willy, perhaps) fails its essential purpose - and yet, we still recognize that the essential purpose of this male organ (and all male organs) is to procreate.
S
spencelo
Guest
Question: what’s the difference, in your view, between function and purpose? Is there a difference?I think we’re not doing a very good job of explaining “objectively procreative.” Let’s go back to the blind man analogy. All eyes are ordered toward vision - let’s say this is referred to eyeballs being “objectively perceptive.” A child born with a lack of visual perception is blind, thus unable to have perceptive vision. However, this does not mean that his eyes are not “objectively perceptive” because the essential purpose of eyeballs are to perceive the world in which the person lives. So, his eyes, though they are objectively perceptive, cannot fulfill their essential purpose. Still, it doesn’t change the fact that the essential purpose of eyeballs are to see the world in which we live.
S
stewstew03
Guest
[BUMPED]But if procreation is “absolutely impossible” for her, how can the act be “ordered towards procreation?”
I think we’re not doing a very good job of explaining “objectively procreative.” Let’s go back to the blind man analogy.
All eyes are ordered toward vision - they are “objectively perceptive.” A child born with a lack of visual perception is blind, thus unable to have perceptive vision. This does not mean, however, that eyeballs lose their primary function. It does mean that his eyes, though they are objectively perceptive, cannot fulfill their essential purpose. Again, the presence of blindness doesn’t change the fact that the essential purpose of eyeballs are to see the world in which we live.
In the same way, the essential purpose of the male organ is to procreate. A sterile male organ (a blind one-eyed Willy, perhaps) fails its essential purpose - and yet, we still recognize that the essential purpose of this male organ (and all male organs) is to procreate
L
livingwordunity
Guest
Penis is made for vagina.Huh? I’m talking about permanently sterile couples – couples for whom procreation is biologically impossible. When procreation is biologically impossible, how can the act be “objectively procreative?”
S
stewstew03
Guest
[Sorry - my other response was bumped.]Question: what’s the difference, in your view, between function and purpose? Is there a difference?
Yes, there is a difference. The purpose is the desired effect, while function is fulfillment of that desired effect. The purpose of eyeballs is to see - but not all eyeballs function in a way that meets that purpose.
S
spencelo
Guest
Suppose I grant that the “essential purpose of eyeballs are to see the world in which we live.” From this, it doesn’t follow that the essential purpose of a *blind man’s eyeballs *are “to see the world in which we live.” Why should I believe that? Similarly, suppose I grant that the “essential purpose of the male organ is to procreate.” From this, why does it follow that the essential purpose of a sterile man’s organ is to procreate?All eyes are ordered toward vision - they are “objectively perceptive.” A child born with a lack of visual perception is blind, thus unable to have perceptive vision. This does not mean, however, that eyeballs lose their primary function. It does mean that his eyes, though they are objectively perceptive, cannot fulfill their essential purpose. Again, the presence of blindness doesn’t change the fact that the essential purpose of eyeballs are to see the world in which we live.
In the same way, the essential purpose of the male organ is to procreate. A sterile male organ (a blind one-eyed Willy, perhaps) fails its essential purpose - and yet, we still recognize that the essential purpose of this male organ (and all male organs) is to procreate
S
spencelo
Guest
This isn’t helpful.Penis is made for vagina.
L
livingwordunity
Guest
Here’s an analogy. A plug is made to fit in a wall outlet even when the power is turned off. Penis is made for vagina.Suppose I grant that the “essential purpose of eyeballs are to see the world in which we live.” From this, it doesn’t follow that the essential purpose of a *blind man’s eyeballs *are “to see the world in which we live.” Similarly, suppose I grant that the “essential purpose of the male organ is to procreate.” From this, why does it follow that the essential purpose of a sterile man’s organ is to procreate?
B
buffalo
Guest
Because it is designed to procreate and it has lost its ability to do so.Suppose I grant that the “essential purpose of eyeballs are to see the world in which we live.” From this, it doesn’t follow that the essential purpose of a *blind man’s eyeballs *are “to see the world in which we live.” Why should I believe that? Similarly, suppose I grant that the “essential purpose of the male organ is to procreate.” From this, why does it follow that the essential purpose of a sterile man’s organ is to procreate?
P
PRmerger
Guest
Because it’s the same as what a married couple does when they are temporarily “sterile”.How can sex between permanently sterile couples - where procreation is impossible - be “ordered towards procreation?”
Perhaps it’s easier for you to see how a married couple’s sex is still objectively procreative when they engage in the act on an infertile day? Can you at least see that?
S
spencelo
Guest
Consider a man born sterile. He hasn’t “lost” his ability to procreate because he never had it.Because it is designed to procreate and it has lost its ability to do so.
S
stewstew03
Guest
I’m not sure what you’re asking. Are you asking, “why must one eyeball be disordered, and the other one ordered?” Are you now proposing that biological disorders are a fiction? There are no disorders, only organs with different purposes?Suppose I grant that the “essential purpose of eyeballs are to see the world in which we live.” From this, it doesn’t follow that the essential purpose of a *blind man’s eyeballs *are “to see the world in which we live.” Why should I believe that? Similarly, suppose I grant that the “essential purpose of the male organ is to procreate.” From this, why does it follow that the essential purpose of a sterile man’s organ is to procreate?
S
spencelo
Guest
Not really. It seems to me that you’re simply defining penis-vagina sex as being “objectively procreative,” even when there isn’t a connection between the act and procreation.Perhaps it’s easier for you to see how a married couple’s sex is still objectively procreative when they engage in the act on an infertile day? Can you at least see that?
S
stewstew03
Guest
You are assuming that each human being’s organs have different biological purposes. Not all lungs, for example, have the primary purpose of drawing in air. Not all hearts have the primary purpose of circulating blood. Is this what you are saying?Consider a man born sterile. He hasn’t “lost” his ability to procreate because he never had it.
S
spencelo
Guest
Let’s stick with your blind man analogy. According to you, the essential purpose of eyeballs is to see, and this is true of both functional eyeballs and non-functional eyeballs. But why should I think this? Suppose I grant that the essential purpose of functional eyeballs is to see, what’s the argument that the essential purpose of non-functional eyeballs is to see (perhaps they have a different purpose, or no purpose at all)?I’m not sure what you’re asking. Are you asking, “why must one eyeball be disordered, and the other one ordered?” Are you now proposing that biological disorders are a fiction? There are no disorders, only organs with different purposes?
P
PRmerger
Guest
No, I’m not defining it that way. Nature has. And actually, YOU have done this, too, implicitly, by your inability to answer my question: is there some other way that you know of to sexually reproduce than p-v sex.Not really. It seems to me that you’re simply defining penis-vagina sex as being “objectively procreative,” even when there isn’t a connection between the act and procreation.
S
stewstew03
Guest
In other words, we’ve approached medicine the wrong way. We should view poor eyesight as something that is not disordered, but something that is a result of eyeballs that have a different (but noble) purpose. There is no need for superficial aids such as eye-glasses. Why would a person born with no legs need a wheelchair? That would diminish the primary purpose of the non-functioning limbs with which they were born. They obviously were not meant to be mobile.Let’s stick with your blind man analogy. According to you, the essential purpose of eyeballs is to see, and this is true of both functional eyeballs and non-functional eyeballs. But why should I think this? Suppose I grant that the essential purpose of functional eyeballs is to see, what’s the argument that the essential purpose of non-functional eyeballs is to see (perhaps they have a different purpose, or no purpose at all)?
S
spencelo
Guest
The claim at issue is whether the essential purpose of non-functioning eyeballs is to see. You say ‘yes,’ but what’s your argument that that’s the case? (And as might be expected, I would ask what’s your argument that the essential purpose of a sterile organ is to procreate.)In other words, we’ve approached medicine the wrong way. We should view poor eyesight as something that is not disordered, but something that is a result of eyeballs that have a different (but noble) purpose. There is no need for superficial aids such as eye-glasses. Why would a person born with no legs need a wheelchair? That would diminish the primary purpose of the non-functioning limbs with which they were born. They obviously were not meant to be mobile.
I’m not sure how your above addresses my question. It appears you are conflating an important distinction, that between (i) the desirability of having functioning eyeballs and (ii) the essential purpose of functioning eyeballs. Consistent with the claim that non-functioning eyeballs do not have the essential purpose of seeing, we should nevertheless strive to help blind people see simply because seeing is desirable.
S
stewstew03
Guest
Yes, and as I’ve said (when you asked me the difference between purpose and function), purpose refers to a desired result in nature. Thus, we want to help blind people see because we want eyeballs to function for their desired purpose. Similarly, “permanently” infertile couples often spend tens of thousands of dollars so that their reproductive organs can function to their desired purpose (obviously this is not always possible).The claim at issue is whether the essential purpose of non-functioning eyeballs is to see. You say ‘yes,’ but what’s your argument that that’s the case? (And as might be expected, I would ask what’s your argument that the essential purpose of a sterile organ is to procreate.)
I’m not sure how your above addresses my question. It appears you are conflating an important distinction, that between (i) the desirability of having functioning eyeballs and (ii) the essential purpose of functioning eyeballs. Consistent with the claim that non-functioning eyeballs do not have the essential purpose of seeing, we should nevertheless strive to help blind people see simply because seeing is desirable.
And, I might add, infertile married couples often seek to adopt children to achieve the primary purpose of marriage; just as non-reproductive gay/lesbian couples seek to adopt children to achieve the primary purpose of marriage… which… is… procreation.
Recap:
Eyeballs
Primary Purpose: Vision
Functioning: Eyesight
Non-functioning: Blindness/Poor eyesight
Male Organ
Primary Purpose: Procreation
Functioning: “Boys can swim” (Seinfeld reference)
Non-functioning: “Boys can’t swim”
- Status
- Not open for further replies.