jcollier@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (John Donald Collier) (05/19/91)
Thank you to everyone who responded. Your remarks and comments have been very helpful. Several people expressed scepticism about the validity of the notion of biological function, especially when used to justify either moral or practical "shoulds". This point is well-taken, though I don't agree with it myself, though my reasons involve some controversial premises and some novel argumentation (for those familiar with the sociobiological literature, the arguments are largely those of Robert Richards). It does seem to me that with our present knowledge, a lot of scepticism towards particular functional claims and their consequences for pratical action is justified. A number of people wrote on the possible motivations of my friend, the Italian mathematician. As I recall, he said that his beliefs on the function of sex (reproduction) made sex more meaningful and enjoyable for him. I should have noted this explicitly in my original post, since it might make both his conscious and unconscious motivations more clear. I certainly do not doubt his claim about this effect of his beliefs. The interaction of beliefs and possible other deep-seated biological tendencies or imperatives makes answering my original question a good deal more complicated than I had originally thought. At least that is progress, of a sort :-). -- John Collier Email: Collier@HPS.unimelb.edu.au HPS -- University of Melbourne jcollier@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au Parkville, Victoria, AUSTRALIA 3052 Fax: 61+3 344 7959