speaking of which, I'm currently procrastinating on a Philosophy of Law paper. My topic is the true fluidity and culturally based nature of so-called "morality". The case in question is Norberg v. Wynrib, concerning a woman whose doctor used his knowledge of her addiction to painkillers to satisfy his sexual desires. Before the case reached the supreme courts, two previous courts decided that Norberg's claim to damages wasn't valid because of a strange legal tenet referred to as "ex turpi causa non oritut actio", which, in this case, dismissed her claim because she happened to be practicing the illegal actt of "double-doctoring" at the time. Anyway, to make a long story short, when we apply Catharine A MacKinnon's theories of law as male power, we can see quite simply that this is evidence of morality as determined moment to moment, and greatly dependent on the dominant patriarchal culture. So, it was fine at the time, but the laws have changed now.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment