Immanuel Kant and Socrates’ debate on sexual perversion

51Due教员组今天给各位留学生带来一篇哲学代写范文，主要内容讲的是康德与苏格拉底关于性变态的争论，利用了对话的形式来突然这篇文章讨论内容。

Tom：Hey bro today we shall talk about the topic of sexual perversion right?

Jerry：Why should we? We philosophers do not agree with each other that often, do we. Every body knows that. Even Plato with his student Aristotle.

Tom：Well, because if we do not argue about sexual perversion, how could we receive a good grade, at least not a bad grade OK? Do not say you guys do not need to do homework, at least I need, so no matter what you think, even take it as a “do me a favor” job would be fine brother, now just please speak out what do you guys think about sexual perversion.

Jerry：OK, you are the boss. When we talking about sexual perversion, there is a sexual and a perversion.

Tom：Yeah, that helps a lot. So at the very beginning we obviously need to define the word sexual first. So what is sexual, what is sex.

Jerry：That is a good beginning. Let met do it , let me do it , Socrates like those questions start with what is . Let me be Socrates: What is sex. What is sexual or sexual behavior.

Tom：The Merriam-Webster defines sex as the heterosexual intercourse, or to say more extensively, as intercourse, with or without the vagina and the penis.

Jerry：Oh yeah Francis Bacon said, knowledge is power, dictionary is full of knowledge, that is good to start with a dictionary.

Tom：I think this definitions is acceptable.

Jerry：Then what about two male or two female, the so called gay and lesbian crowd, do not they have sex? No body think so, do we. Since almost all of the human beings have sexual desire, it is reasonable to suppose almost all of the couples have sex. But obviously for homosexual couples there is no both vagina and penis exist at one time.

Tom：Well it seems the vagina and penis are not necessary and sufficient conditions for sex. That is the first confusion and Greta Christina defines sex as penetration at first.

Jerry：Yeah but we could not define sex as two people face each other naked. That is also not that proper, is not it. Experiencing sexual desire either, not exactly equals to sex. You could experience sexual desire while having sex, and you could experience sexual desire either while doing something else, the oral , the anal, the kissing, groping, Dry-humping and so on, on the other hand, when having sex, you may experience sexual desire, and you may not, it has no inevitable causal connection either.  Imagine a tired prostitute who has experienced over ten customers in a single day, I do not think there is still that much sexual desire to let off, and let me push it farther, the drunk woman being raped with no consciousness, who does not even know the sex happened, but the rape do should counts. And the crime of Insulting Corpse, necrophilia, why call it a crime, because the criminal did the sex behavior, though corpse has no feelings anymore, not sexual desire too. However, the sex behavior could not be denied.

Tom：And masturbation, it is a typical example of experiencing sexual desire but Immanuel Kant will not call it as having sex. He might consider it as disgrace behavior.

Jerry：Well it seems Greta Christina’s definition of “the conscious, consenting, mutually acknowledged pursuit of shared sexual pleasure” is also full of questions. Many school students conscious, consenting, shared sexual pleasure but really acknowledged. So do that counts. Shared sexual pleasure, yeah, the disgrace behavior masturbation again. If saying pleasure, there are more divergence of views I am afraid.

Jerry：In Socrates’ word, she tried yet has not reached a satisfactory definition.

Tom：Well, never mind, keep one’s own definition for sex would be OK, philosophy is about finding the way for exploring the world and the nature, not the law to obey or the force to bring everything under control, there is no contradiction for people to have their own point of view, every philosopher can hold his own theory, every citizen either, there would be nothing wrong. Let us move on brother. The problem of what is sexual perversion.

Jerry：Yes, yes, Let met do it , let me do it , leave the what is questions to Socrates: Now what is sexual perversion.

Tom：Let me try to express in Immanuel Kant’s way: I will say masturbation, masturbation is obviously sexual perversion. A graceful man with dignity should not pursue just simply carnal desire, that kind of blasphemy behavior is shameful, because sex should be based on nature's sexual purpose, masturbation is totally offense against the nature. Nature rules called the species on the earth to do the right thing for reproduction, but no rules is ever about seeking the carnal  pleasure, as a result, that kind of behavior is not arouse by the authentic existence, but aroused by one’s imagination, not for real, then that is against the true nature desire, thus it is totally different from the sex act for normal reproduction, therefore, the masturbation act is betrayal, of both reason and society.

Jerry：Maybe Sigmund Freud would prefer to take the masturbation as some sort of infatuation, the only problem is that infatuation is not for another man or woman as normal, but for him or her self.

Tom：Immanuel Kant might insist it is enough to be called as a sexual perversion. Oh maybe not just sexual perversion, or to be called as self indulgence, evil, vicious behavior, violation against the nature.

Jerry：But I would like to say, masturbation is one of the activities which could reach the final sexual pleasure, is not it, so why there is anything wrong with masturbation, just a normal activity which could be conducted all by one self. There is no such definition which defines that sexual activity must be made with two persons, is it? According to Sigmund Freud, masturbation is a normal behavior which should be treated with a little bit disciplines but by no means could be called a disgrace.

Jerry：And if I were Marshall Rosenberg I might ask like this, before we discuss the masturbation issue, should not we talk about the perversion first? You know, when talking about the word perversion, obviously we should define what kind of behavior is normal, so we could figure out what is not normal, what is perversion right? Even if we do not give the definition of sex now, with no science experiment who could be the qualified person to do the judgement, why could he judge other people, or to say, why could a group of people judge another group of people, why, how, with no scientific experiment, who could say he is right, even if somebody is one hundred percent right, how could he judge other people, even the god judge no man, life is rich and varied, human beings are complicated, so it is not that proper to treat others as aberration, especially one’s personal behaviors, privacy of an individual.

Tom：Calm down bro, we do what philosophers should do would be fine, we have not reach a satisfactory definition of sex, that is true, that is the fact we could not deny, but there is nothing wrong with this bro, we know what we do not know, we know our ignorance and admit it, that is a good thing, far more better than those who do not know his ignorance at all, but to boast his intelligence all day long. That is your favorite Socrates’ style, right? Not judge, not exactly.

Jerry：As you have mentioned the nature's sexual purpose, I would like to pretend to be G. W. F. Hegel：Only the free will should be qualified to decide the real purpose, the absolute and ultimate purpose, as long as the act is conducted by one’s own desire, one’s own free will, not be forced by any other power, why could not leave it alone and let it be, anything that exists is reasonable, why could not masturbation be counted as a normal sex act, with little cost of both money and time. Seeking for pleasure is the nature of human beings, we read comic books for mental pleasure, eat delicious food for appetite pleasure, we date for spirit pleasure, and we make friends with other people for motional pleasure, so why could not people seek sexual pleasure by doing some masturbation. As masturbation exist, it is a fact, a fact that has been chosen by plenty of people with their free will, that is their rational choice, so it is acceptable.

Tom：No I could not agree with the anything that exists is reasonable theory, according to Immanuel Kant, human beings are not born to be a good, kind hearted, noble man, only a lot of education and long time discipline could make a man a noble man, the nature of human beings are not all good at all, we are lazy, greed, easy to indulge in the gluttony, do not want to go to work, to make the effort for what we want, but we like to gain, especially dream for gaining without any pain, that is the nature of human, that exist broadly, almost everywhere, almost everyone likes easy life. But how could we say it is right or it is reasonable, it is just bad nature, we just need to make effort to educate ourselves and to avoid that kind of lust and desire happen, take a look at the newspapers or magazine or surfing on the internet or something like that, there are plenty of report about a bunch of bad buys who steal, rob a bank, crime a murder, defraud money and property and a lot of bad things like that, you can not miss it. They chose to do that all by their free will, those crime do exist, but not rational, only human nature is by no means good purpose, as a result we could not count on people’s free will. Human beings need self discipline, we should not do everything that we feel ourselves want to do, just like the masturbation, it is bad lust, play with one’s own body is the betrayal, against of both reason and society I am afraid.

Jerry：Aristotle like laws, he thought people should be bound by code of ethics and laws, to restrain their behaviors. Human beings are social animals, human society need order, and since the emergence of the controlling form of country, all governments make rules to manage the people.

Tom：By they way, convention is not really a solid basis to buttress one’s arguments.

Jerry：Remember Diogenēs? he prefers to take masturbation as one of the most simple, normal, basic, necessary physiological activity just like eat food when you are hungry and drink water when you are thirsty, has nothing to do with dignity or grace. You need it, then you do it , why would it even worth being discussed. Why waste time on the self physiological activity stuff even with no second person participated, why do not we see something else more worthy, do we.

Tom：So I will take the BDSM(bondage and discipline，dominance and submission， sadism and masochism) as sexual perversion. Sex should be a matter of happiness, we human beings like happiness, we chase for happiness, we pay for happiness, but the imprison, torture, enslave and something like that is not normal pleasure, those acts represent painful, undesired, being imposed against one's will and may even cause harm to them, which are exactly against freedom, fairness, that we human pursued decades for.

Jerry：Let me do some Socrates’ ask: but to do those bondage and discipline, dominance and submission，sadism and masochism things, are the choices made by themselves, no one forced them to suffer, they made their own decision freely, that is a big fact you can not ignore.

Tom：So it seems we could no even define sex as an act of seeking pleasure any more.

Jerry： No, not really. Maybe the suffer itself is a pleasure, which is just expressed in another term, as for those BDSM fans, the ancient Chinese philosopher with the name of Meng zi ever said a story, one person said, look at that fish in the river, how happy they are, and the other person said, you are not the fish, how could you know it is happy. As for here, we could say , you are not the BDSM fans, how could you know the suffer in your eyes is not pleasure in their eyes.

Tom：So you mean pleasure can be suffer, suffer can be pleasure, well, sort of paradox, sort of reasonable. oh I would like to agree both, can I .

Jerry：Any opinion is fine. I am just wondering, if Roger Bacon is here, what would he say.

Tom：Him, oh yeah, maybe……maybe he will say：we should try that ourselves first before we discuss that right? Though logically speaking, it sounds somewhat unhappy but, without practice, no one could say what exactly it feels, all conclusion should be made begin with the sensory organ, then comes to rationality I insist. Science experiment, Francis Bacon prefer science experiment.

Jerry：no, I prefer not.

Jerry：Oh by the way, I need to say, Socrates prefer to define the sensibility and rationality as totally different thing, sensory organ stuff could not comes to rationality, we gain intelligence by ponder and deep thought, contemplation, meditation, and reflection to discuss the essence of things, but by no sensibility, sensibility is sensibility and rationality is rationality, they are totally different things, with no connections.  

Tom：OK brother, good debate, enough for today, see you later.

 

 

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创优秀代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。主要业务有essay代写、assignment代写、paper代写、作业代写服务。

51due为留学生提供最好的作业代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多代写范文提供作业代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ：800020041。