Posts

On What Kind of Lust Jesus Condemns

Image
It is well known that Jesus accuses people with lustful thoughts of the crime of adultery in the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew 5.28 (ESV) - But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Let's say someone has committed adultery with a woman in his heart. How bad is that, according to Jesus? The passage immediately after gives us a pretty good idea: Matthew 5.29–30 (ESV) - If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be thrown into hell. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell. It’s hella bad. But how often do we human beings actually commit adultery in our hearts? Do we do so every time we, say, use porn to get off? To figure that out, we need to elucidate Jesus’ teaching by precisifying o
Post a Comment
Read more

Must We Vote, or At Least Stay Informed?

Intuitively, the reason we care so much about enfranchisement is that we want a say in how our society is run. We want the option to intervene when it looks like an incompetent candidate for office might be elected if we stand idly by. But often it may seem to us that all the candidates are equally competent, for all intents and purposes. Then there's no need to vote. So what matters is not so much actually voting as having the power to vote when necessary. I owe this point to the real MVP, Kane B . But this is too superficial. A moment's reflection raises the question, what good is the power to vote when necessary if you don't know when voting is necessary? Simple. It's worth jack shit, unless you decide to vote anyway. So if we want our voting power to be worth something even though we only vote when it seems called for, we need to at least be aware of when a vote is called for—when it might well make an important difference. Does this mean we're obligated t
Post a Comment
Read more

An Obscure, Perplexing Biblical Passage

Image
Recently I was scouring the Gospels for evidence as to whether—according to the text—Jesus was truly willing to be crucified, as God (the Father) demanded that Jesus do. I came across this bizarre passage in John 19: 10 Pilate therefore said to him [i.e., Jesus], "Do you refuse to speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you, and power to crucify you?" 11 Jesus answered him, "You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above; therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin." Let S <–; be Jesus' statement before the semicolon ("You would have no . . . "). Let S ;–> be Jesus' statement after the semicolon ("therefore the one who . . . "). It's quite natural to interpret  S <–;  as asserting that Pilate only has power to release or crucify Jesus insofar as God allows, or wants, Pilate to do so. But doesn't this mean that, in a certain sense, God handed Jesus ove
Post a Comment
Read more

Why God Killed Onan

Image
The biblical story of Onan in Genesis 38.6–11 is one that has traditionally been used by Christians, especially Catholics, to show that God detests contraceptive sex and masturbation, or at least male masturbation (since the loss of sperm leads to loss of life, i.e. loss of a substance with the potential to produce offspring). Not just masturbation accompanied by sexual fantasy, visual aids, etc., but any self-stimulation of one's genitalia without reproduction as its end goal. But I'm partial to another interpretation of the biblical text, one that Catholic Answers says  has become the orthodoxy in contemporary biblical exegesis. According to this standard interpretation, Onan's sin was failing to perform his duty to impregnate his widowed sister-in-law—nothing more, nothing less. This Israelite practice that Onan failed to follow was known as levirate marriage . Had Onan's brother not died, Onan could have engaged in as much masturbation and contraceptive sex as he pl
Post a Comment
Read more

Scruton Scrutinized: Personal vs. Purely Bodily Beauty

Image
Sir Roger Scruton is a well-known conservative philosopher. He is frequently cited by philosophically inclined anti-porn activists. So naturally, I've started reading Scruton's work on beauty, sexual desire, and pornography. Scruton is an excellent writer, and I've found that he and I actually have a decent amount of common ground. But I'm unpersuaded by the case against sex work that I have seen in his writings. Even if we recognize and respect the kind of beauty Scruton emphasizes, we need not abolish sex work. I explain why that's the case in this post, where I reflect on some passages from Scruton's book  Beauty  that caught my attention. Beauty: The Centerf–... err, –piece of Scruton's Anti-Porn Ethic On p. 47, Scruton writes: There is a distinction, familiar to all of us, between an interest in a person's body and an interest in a person a s embodied . A body is an assemblage of body parts; an embodied person is a free being revealed in the fle
Post a Comment
Read more

Loving Porn: Answering Steven Dunn on the Philosophy of Porn

Image
Steven Dunn of Hellenistic Christendom has posted a reply to my partial defense of the sex industry . The effort he makes to set aside our differences on God and religion is honorable. I also appreciate the charity, open-mindedness, sophistication, and knowledge Steven has brought to the discussion. One example of his displaying these virtues: "if Ben is indeed correct in his perspective, I want nothing held back from what possible ignorance I could be harboring in my understanding of pornography and even of human persons. I hope Ben should feel the same towards me." Indeed, I feel the same. What follows is an answer to the purely philosophical parts of Steven's piece. I'm saving my analysis of his scientific references for later; I plan to publish it along with my analysis of the scientific article my friend Art Alvara shared with me. Blaming Porn Itself In my original piece I sympathized with YouTuber Kane B's thought that most who accuse porn of &qu
Post a Comment
Read more

Devaluation in the Sex Industry

Image
My YouTube philosophy idol, Kane B, briefly commented on the popular idea that porn (among other things, of course) objectifies women. In a nutshell, he opined that most people who use the word "objectification" are just making noises expressing disgust and disapproval. Their objection to porn doesn't withstand the slightest scrutiny. Kane B's statement resonated with me when I first heard it, and to a degree it still does. I'm very unclear on what many people mean by "objectification." But in this article I address excerpts from one of the most highly regarded popular-level books raising the objectification charge against the sex industry: Matt Fradd's The Porn Myth . Even if I can't tell you what definition of "objectification" Fradd uses, he explains his concern clearly and thoroughly enough to give me some grasp of the concept. To the extent that the charge is meaningful, I conclude that it nonetheless collapses under scrutiny. S
Post a Comment
Read more