Sexual Ethics in College Textbooks: A Survey

D. Helminiak
{"title":"Sexual Ethics in College Textbooks: A Survey","authors":"D. Helminiak","doi":"10.1080/01614576.2001.11074390","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author reviewed 10 sexuality textbooks and found that they (a) are generally concerned about sexual ethics, (b) evince confusion about the nature of ethics and the role of social scientists vis-à-vis ethics, (c) explicitly disclaim ethical judgments, but (d) implicitly advocate a consistent set of values and behaviors. This incoherent state of affairs calls for rethinking. Presuming that empirically grounded determinations of what is healthy or unhealthy, enhancing or destructive of persons and relationships, is the very intent of the terms right and wrong, good and evil, the author suggests that sexologists qua sexologists may propose, and even ought to propose, these determinations as ethical prescriptions.","PeriodicalId":83768,"journal":{"name":"Journal of sex education and therapy","volume":"26 1","pages":"106 - 114"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2001-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/01614576.2001.11074390","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of sex education and therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01614576.2001.11074390","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The author reviewed 10 sexuality textbooks and found that they (a) are generally concerned about sexual ethics, (b) evince confusion about the nature of ethics and the role of social scientists vis-à-vis ethics, (c) explicitly disclaim ethical judgments, but (d) implicitly advocate a consistent set of values and behaviors. This incoherent state of affairs calls for rethinking. Presuming that empirically grounded determinations of what is healthy or unhealthy, enhancing or destructive of persons and relationships, is the very intent of the terms right and wrong, good and evil, the author suggests that sexologists qua sexologists may propose, and even ought to propose, these determinations as ethical prescriptions.
大学教材中的性伦理:一个调查
作者回顾了10本性教科书,发现它们(a)普遍关注性伦理,(b)表明对伦理的本质和社会科学家对-à-vis伦理的作用的混淆,(c)明确否认伦理判断,但(d)隐含地提倡一套一致的价值观和行为。这种不连贯的状态需要重新思考。假设对健康或不健康、对个人和人际关系的促进或破坏的经验基础决定,是对与错、善与恶等术语的真正意图,作者建议性学家作为性学家可以提出,甚至应该提出,这些决定作为伦理处方。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书