Thomas Nagel Sexual Perversion Rhetorical Analysis

1102 Words5 Pages
What constitutes sexual perversion? This question has certainly been addressed time and again throughout history. Each time the general social attitude toward sexuality changes so does the answer. Some who argue from an unchangeable, dogmatic position have maintained their views – but the question remains, and even these institutions have amended their views to some degree. The sexual liberation of the sixties and seventies brought with it a new line of questioning. Sex was free again, or so the argument went. Now the question of just what is acceptable sex was compelled to the forefront of public discussion. Religious and political pundits have offered their views, so have many Philosophers. I will be discussing the arguments of two a Philosopher who wrote in the midst of the sexual liberation. Thomas Nagel has closely related arguments with some points of agreement and some in contention. Thomas Nagel establishes the “sex as communication” metaphor when he presents his own argument for what constitutes sexual perversion. Before he makes his case he offers what he calls the “skeptical argument”. This argument contends that sex is an appetite like any other, with a number of ways of being sated. None of these ways, as odd or irregular as they may seem, should be considered unnatural. Therefore, once…show more content…
However, certain questions are quickly raised in my mind. For one, Nagel makes no room for masturbation, unfortunately not addressing it at all. I say unfortunately because masturbation is so commonly called into question in the discussion of what constitutes sexual perversion. Nagel’s hypothetical situation is far too vague to truly establish an argument on. I wonder if there is any measure for how saturated with sexual desire one is? Also, as many have wondered, would any type of sexual expression between Romeo and Juliet have been
Open Document