Perverted faculty argument

The perverted faculty argument, rooted in natural law theory, claims that using a faculty in a way that actively prevents its natural end is inherently immoral. Essentially, it suggests that if a faculty (like the sexual organs) has a specific purpose (like reproduction), then using it in a way that prevents that purpose is wrong, even if the action itself doesn’t cause harm.

Natural Ends: The argument posits that natural things, including human faculties, have inherent purposes or ends determined by their nature.
Perversion: Perversion, in this context, isn’t about personal preference but about actively hindering or frustrating a faculty’s natural end.
Example: A common application of this argument is in discussions about the morality of contraception. The argument suggests that using contraception perverts the sexual faculty by preventing its natural end of procreation.
Controversy: The perverted faculty argument is not universally accepted. Critics argue that it relies on a potentially flawed understanding of natural law and teleology (the study of final causes). They may also question the idea that all natural faculties have only one specific end.
Edward Feser’s View: Philosopher Edward Feser is a contemporary proponent of the perverted faculty argument, particularly in the context of sexual ethics. He argues that there are no other convincing arguments against practices like contraception besides appeals to religious authority or tradition.
Counterarguments: Some argue that the natural end of sexual activity is not solely procreation, but also includes pleasure and bonding. Others point out that simply not using a faculty, or using it for a different end, doesn’t necessarily constitute perversion. For example, they might argue that applying antiperspirant doesn’t prevent the natural function of perspiration (cooling the body) according to a blog post on biblical scholarship.

AI responses may include mistakes.

[1] https://digitalcommons.providence.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1012&context=philosophy_fac

[2] https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2019/09/55970/

[3] https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/46909/the-perverted-faculty-argument

[4] http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2017/02/how-to-be-pervert.html

[5] https://www.reddit.com/r/CatholicPhilosophy/comments/1mkwr6v/is_this_perverted_faculty_argument_against/

[6] https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/14s2djw/what_do_philosophers_think_of_the_perverted/