This wholehearted identification means that there is no ambivalence in his attitude towards himself. There is no part of him - no part with which he identifies - that is opposed to or that resists his loving what he loves.This particular picture of self-love, i.e., endorsing and identifying with what one loves, is viewed by Whisnant as "distinctive of how one must approach one's own loves in order to be properly self-valuing." (p. 209) Self-centering involves more than this brand of love, but no other aspect of her theory seems to me as controversial as this. Take, for instance, a man consumed and obsessed with pornography. He is ignorant of the relavent moral issues, so he feels no guilt or shame. In fact, he and his buddies all share in the same perverse enthusiasm. Assuming he is content with other aspects of his life, this man is, according to Frankfurt and Whisnant, self-loving, self-centered and a fully functioning morally responsible agent. Do you see the obvious problem here? Whisnant is full-heartedly opposed to pornography and has devoted much of her life to researching and uncovering the direct harms it causes. If she condemns this man, she contradicts her own theory, because he should be functioning as a morally responsible agent, but he is obviously not. This paradox applies not only to pornography but to other immoral habits as well, such as stealing, drug abuse, etc.Moral Psychology: Feminist Ethics and Social Theory, p. 209
It seems to escape this dilemma we must either draw a line between love and immorality, finding a way to demonstrate their incompatibility, or declare those who profess love to any immoral acts as morally inhibited, diminished or incompetent in one way or another effectively disqualifying them as candidates of self-centeredness.
No comments:
Post a Comment