login about faq
0
1

Why does Objectivism hold that sex only for physical pleasure is problematic?

asked Feb 08 '12 at 12:24

catmap's gravatar image

catmap
5013

edited Feb 08 '12 at 16:49

Andrew%20Dalton's gravatar image

Andrew Dalton ♦
10009447

The responses found here are legit answers for this question.

(Feb 08 '12 at 17:39) Humbug Humbug's gravatar image

The answer to the question as stated in the summary is clearly "yes": sex can be for physical pleasure only. The more interesting question, touched on in the body (no pun intended) is whether it should be. This could be answered either briefly or at great length, and I'm going to go for brief.

The problem with sex as purely physical pleasure is that it can be so, so much better than that, and deliberately pursuing it as purely physical makes it harder to find a romantic partner with whom the physical and spiritual elements of sex unite.

answered Feb 13 '12 at 18:15

Kyle%20Haight's gravatar image

Kyle Haight ♦
12903

"deliberately pursuing it as purely physical makes it harder to find a romantic partner with whom the physical and spiritual elements of sex unite."

Has this been proved? Most Objectivists I know see no problem with one night stands.

(Feb 19 '12 at 07:29) catmap catmap's gravatar image

The "can" wording was my editing. (The original submission was not even stated as a question.)

(Feb 19 '12 at 19:50) Andrew Dalton ♦ Andrew%20Dalton's gravatar image

Follow this question

By Email:

Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here

By RSS:

Answers

Answers and Comments

Share This Page:

Tags:

×223
×65
×23

Asked: Feb 08 '12 at 12:24

Seen: 2,204 times

Last updated: Feb 19 '12 at 19:50