What Is the Future of Sex?

Why do we have sex?

Many of our responses, perhaps for reference, have reproduction. Sex is the primary form of childbirth.

But what about sex if it has nothing to do with reproduction?

Since the birth of the first tube baby in 1978, some 8 million people have been born in advanced ways of reproduction. And the number may grow to a remarkable extent in the future, as the tools for identifying genetic risks in embryos are becoming increasingly sophisticated. My strongest forecast for the future is that people will have sex but not so often in order to have children,” says Henry T. Grace, author of Sex End and the Future of Human Reproduction. “in the next 20 to 40 years, most people in the world with good health coverage will choose to produce the baby through the lab. ”

Greely's book explores some of the legal and ethical challenges facing PGD science.

“

That question is posed by David Halper in a provocative essay with the same title. Sex, we reason, always have to have one. Such persecution is not necessarily bad. After all, being human means being a fornicator, intellectually, and emotionally. The experience of sex and theoretization in its meaning seems natural to animals who spend most of their time on high - level critiques, explains Periscope.

Biologically, there is clear reason for human sex. We have sex because we thus meet biological incentives, including the incentive needed to bear children and to connect with other people. In fact, these are the two reasons that have already been overcome in Western tradition, which are organized around the telos, or the ultimate purpose.

As I wrote in a previous article, Stoics were the ones who tried to get sex into a scheme of meaning - enjoying sex was right as long as it served to have children. This ethics also functioned in Christian tradition, and it continues to carry an attitude in the West.

The other reason for sex comes from Aristotle. This is the sylosgeism of Greek philosopher IV before the birth of Christ.

And then falling in love is preferable for sexual relations according to the nature of erotic desires. Erotic desire, then, is more a desire for love than for sex. If it's mostly about him, then it's his purpose. Even sex, then, is not a goal in itself but is for the sake of being loving. ”

For Aristotle, Halper explains, “Love is the telos of erotic desire. It's not love that rushes into sex like its purpose... it's sex that rushes to love. The real reason why we have sex, according to Aristotle, is not that we want to have sex, but because we want to love and fall in love.

Like so many other people, Aristotle thinks that sex and love are related but he doesn't try to demonstrate this assumption. What he demonstrates, however, is that “sex is not the ultimate purpose of erotic desire”. The question that arises, then, is not that of dating and love but between sex and erotic desire. If Aristotle's right, then sex isn't really about sex.

Why do we have sex then? To have children, of course. So we can connect with others, too. But these are just two possible reasons. Like many cultural phenomena, sex exceeds its reason. Just like food. We eat not only to survive but also to enjoy. The difference between us and other nonhuman animals is that we regularly reap satisfaction from useless things. It's possible, writes Halperin, that the “anx only makes sense when it doesn't mean anything. ”

Maybe it's time for us to admit that pleasure is the main reason why most of us have sex.

In this sense, the pills [against pregnancy] were revolutionary, giving people great fear. In 196, writer Pearl Buch says, “Everyone knows what a pill is. It's a small object, yet its effects on society can be even more devastating than those of a nuclear bomb. Like many of the conservative ideas, Buck's argument seems to be based on hysteria that sex for no reason would end civilization.

So over a few decades, Westerners became more open to extramarital sex. Also, by moving further and further from religion to a more individualized world, Westerners believe that sexuality should not be distributed by social conventions. Recent genes also work on this belief by reporting a much higher number of sexual partners.

Our views on sex, thus, are products of our country and our time. Our sexual ethics is not inconsistent: it evolves, and it will continue to evolve. Maybe, a lot faster than we think.

What's natural?

Like any other human phenomenon, sexual activity comes from nowhere. It's not just here. We arrived at our sexual and ethical practices and practices on sex through a long way from previous animals.

But even if we concentrate on our species, we find lots of evidence that some of the traditional ideas about sex are less natural than we thought.

Christian pastors jokingly argued that two members of the same gender should not have sex with each other and that animals knew that. But the truth is, even animals do.

In a survey made this year, YouGov noted that 4 out of 10 young Americans did not identify themselves as the “heterosexual leaders. ”

A few years ago at a conference, I heard philosopher Judith Butler say, “maybe the really queer thing to do with sex is just enjoy it.” I didn't agree back then, but now I see that it makes sense.

In the future, the meaning of sex will be sexy. /BBC/Periscope