BTH Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 I know it's not a perfect comparison, but under the pretense that there are no consequences on either side (sex or robbing banks) there would still be people who decide to resist their instincts in both occasions. Maybe because they know that both pleasures are only temporary and will not lead to long-term happiness? Personally, given a choice between the two situations, I'd take the money though. Besides, with the million bucks you can buy a prostitute or two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quebecois Posted December 1, 2008 Share Posted December 1, 2008 As others have implicitly pointed out, there is an absolute qualitative difference between robbing a bank and having casual sex. This difference is sufficient as to render any syllogism drawn therefrom moot. A bank robbery necessarily requires one to dispossess another. The act itself creates a negative effect. This is not true for sex. There can be times where engaging in sex will create a negative result, but it will not be simply because an additional act of intercourse has occurred. My point with the bank was in response to faerie's argument of sex without any sort of consequences. It was weak, but the basis still stands, every action has positive consequences and negative consequences. To me there is no use in thinking of an action that is absent of consequences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simonus Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 My point with the bank was in response to faerie's argument of sex without any sort of consequences. It was weak, but the basis still stands, every action has positive consequences and negative consequences. To me there is no use in thinking of an action that is absent of consequences. I interpret, or I choose to interpret, Faerie's hypo as a statement of the basic drives of human beings rather than a statement of real situations. Basically, there was an apparent disagreement as to the null state off people in regards to sex - whether absent other considerations a person would want to have sex with an attractive potential mate. If we cannot agree as to the basic desire of a person then it is impossible to discuss how a modifying factor affects decision making. If one begins a discussion about sexual decision making with the a priori that a person does not necessarily have such a drive, the discussion really has nowhere to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quebecois Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 I interpreted fairie as saying that no one could resist sex if there were no consequences. a. there has to be consequences b. there is a rather large culture of asexual and celibate people. To suggest that they only choose to live this way because they "can't get any" is a bit absurd to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeLassister Posted December 2, 2008 Share Posted December 2, 2008 If you asked me wich post has the less chance to hit the 3 pages mark, I would have vote for this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.