Posts: 6120
Threads: 64
Joined: June 5, 2013
Reputation:
65
The naturalistic fallacy and masturbation
October 29, 2014 at 10:35 pm
I was just making dinner and thinking about masturbation (because, you know, why not?) and got to thinking about the standard defense rolled out of "it's perfectly natural to masturbate, it's a normal human act of exploring your own sexuality and yadda yadda yadda..." and got to wondering whether this falls prey to the naturalistic fallacy.
It's okay to masturbate because it's natural.
Thoughts? Does this qualify as a fallacious argument or not?
(full disclosure, I haven't given this a huge deal of thought. In fact, I'm still making dinner.) 
Teenaged X-Files obsession + Bermuda Triangle episode + Self-led school research project = Atheist.
Posts: 35341
Threads: 205
Joined: August 13, 2012
Reputation:
146
RE: The naturalistic fallacy and masturbation
October 29, 2014 at 10:40 pm
I hope you washed your hands . . .
Playing Cluedo with my mum while I was at Uni:
"You did WHAT? With WHO? WHERE???"
Posts: 5706
Threads: 67
Joined: June 13, 2014
Reputation:
69
RE: The naturalistic fallacy and masturbation
October 29, 2014 at 10:45 pm
Don't think too hard and burn the dinner.
Masturbation is indeed natural. So are murder and rape. It's just that rape and murder are not only rarer, but not okay. The difference is that masturbation (baring special circumstances like doing it in the middle of mom's tea party) hurts no one including the masturbater whereas rape and murder do whether you do them at mom's tea party or any where else.
I would say masturbation is okay because it hurts no one. There's even some evidence that it's good for your health.
If there is a god, I want to believe that there is a god. If there is not a god, I want to believe that there is no god.
Posts: 9176
Threads: 76
Joined: November 21, 2013
Reputation:
40
RE: The naturalistic fallacy and masturbation
October 29, 2014 at 10:46 pm
It's ok to masturbate because it has health benefits, and hurts no one.
I know that just because it happens in nature, it doesn't mean we should do it. We should decide on things that are ok to do according to how much it helps, compared to how much it harms. Masturbation helps in a few ways, and doesn't harm anyone as long as you don't do it excessively. All good things in moderation.
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: The naturalistic fallacy and masturbation
October 29, 2014 at 10:47 pm
I think that's an appeal to nature, not a naturalistic fallacy.
Posts: 6120
Threads: 64
Joined: June 5, 2013
Reputation:
65
RE: The naturalistic fallacy and masturbation
October 29, 2014 at 11:09 pm
The argument that masturbation is good (or acceptable) because it does no harm to anyone or because it has potential health benefits are a different argument to me than simply saying that it's good (or acceptable) because it's a natural human act. I don't disagree with the statements that it's good (or acceptable) because it doesn't cause harm or it has health befits, my question is specifically about people who defend masturbation "because it's natural."
Based on my understanding the health and harm arguments are satisfactory in the sense that they aren't fallacious, but I think the "because it's natural" argument is.
Teenaged X-Files obsession + Bermuda Triangle episode + Self-led school research project = Atheist.
Posts: 19789
Threads: 57
Joined: September 24, 2010
Reputation:
85
RE: The naturalistic fallacy and masturbation
October 30, 2014 at 12:11 am
(This post was last modified: October 30, 2014 at 12:11 am by Anomalocaris.)
That's an appeal to nature. It's natural, therefore it is good. That a fallacy, but a different fallacy from naturalistic fallacy, which might go something like, it feels good, therefore naturally it must be good.
Posts: 9147
Threads: 83
Joined: May 22, 2013
Reputation:
46
RE: The naturalistic fallacy and masturbation
October 30, 2014 at 12:22 am
Nature sucks. Mosquitos everywhere, no birth control, and no hot baths. Highly over-rated.
Posts: 5492
Threads: 53
Joined: September 4, 2014
Reputation:
55
RE: The naturalistic fallacy and masturbation
October 30, 2014 at 2:33 am
I'm waiting on someone (Losty, whateverist) to say "it's especially good when CluelessMorgan does it." but I guess I have to be the weird Internet perv. Way to drop the ball team!
I can't remember where this verse is from, I think it got removed from canon:
"I don't hang around with mostly men because I'm gay. It's because men are better than women. Better trained, better equipped...better. Just better! I'm not gay."
For context, this is the previous verse:
"Hi Jesus" -robvalue
Posts: 23918
Threads: 300
Joined: June 25, 2011
Reputation:
151
RE: The naturalistic fallacy and masturbation
October 30, 2014 at 2:35 am
(This post was last modified: October 30, 2014 at 2:37 am by Whateverist.)
(October 29, 2014 at 10:35 pm)Clueless Morgan Wrote: I was just making dinner and thinking about masturbation (because, you know, why not?) and got to thinking about the standard defense rolled out of "it's perfectly natural to masturbate, it's a normal human act of exploring your own sexuality and yadda yadda yadda..." and got to wondering whether this falls prey to the naturalistic fallacy.
It's okay to masturbate because it's natural.
Thoughts? Does this qualify as a fallacious argument or not?
(full disclosure, I haven't given this a huge deal of thought. In fact, I'm still making dinner.)
Well yeah, if you carry on like that dinner may take a very long time. (Hope you washed.) 
Doh, beaten to the punch. Well played, Beccs, well played.
Does masturbation require a rationalization? If you wanna, go ahead. If not, lets eat.
|
