Re: Taylor, Sartre, and sexuality


You may be right about context, but this is one of Sartre's weakest works. I
would not be surprised if the context does not improve the argument. I agree
that there is much better stuff in Sartre than this.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Nate Goralnik" <rhizome85@xxxxxxxx>
To: <foucault@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2001 8:29 PM
Subject: RE: Taylor, Sartre, and sexuality

> Regarding Sartre, Matt says:
> >Sartre, on the other hand, *does* make the quasi-Kantian argument
> about
> >sexuality. Here is a passage from _Existentialism and Humanism_:
> >
> >"When I confront a real situation--for example, that I am a
> sexual being,
> >able to have relations with a being of the other sex and able
> to have
> >children--I am obliged to choose my attitude to it, and in every
> respect I
> >bear the responsibility of the choice which, in committing myself,
> also
> >commits the whole of humanity" (Jean-Paul Sartre, _Existentialism
> and
> >Humanism_, Tr. Philip Mairet, Methuen, 1973, p. 48).
> I don't know the context of this passage, but based on my knowledge
> of Sartre's ethics I don't think that it is fair to interpret
> Sartre as making the "quasi-Kantian" argument being discussed.
> Perhaps the context will prove me wrong, but I think Sartre here
> is simply using sexuality as an example. You could perhaps argue
> that Sartre's ethics leads one into the kind of thinking whereby
> one would evaluate the consequences of everyone's having sex
> exclusively with people of the same gender...
> ~Nate
> --
> "If some woman tried to kick my ass, I'd be like, 'Hey...woman!
> Don't you dress me a mailman...and make me dance for
> you...while you go smoke the bedroom...and have sex
> with some guy...I don't even know...on my dad's bed!'"
> ~Eric Cartman

Partial thread listing: