Blog 7

I found the stark contrast between Sctuton's Aristotelian view and Goldman's Kantian view quite interesting; however I found Chung Tse's take on the definition of procreation, sexual morality and desire the most intriguing.  He claims procreation does not start and end with intercourse but rather begins with intercourse and ends when the child is born nine months later; this is why sexual activity holds the 'highest place' in Confucian life.  Tse's definition goes well with Scruton's view of sexual desire where love is the most powerful self fulfillment while erotic love and lust are habits of desire.  Even here though Scruton claims that our base desire is for physical contact and pleasure (both in a sexual and non sexual way).   If love is the most powerful form of self fulfillment and sex (physical contact & pleasure) is the outcome of this fulfillment then it would only be logical that with Tse's view, procreation is the product of love.  This is very interesting to me because this would mean that biologically and culturally we have evolved to where our life purpose is primarily to procreate.  But even then, all love has to have some sort of sexual desire in its roots; if Scruton truly took the Aristotelian stance, wouldn't doing things only out of often misplaced desire be a fundamental flaw?