Philosophy of Love and Sex Final Paper

Phil  325:  Philosophy  of  Sex  &  Love     Fall  2014   Prof.  Shlomo  Sher    

Final  Paper    

Your  paper  should  be  1000-­‐1500  words    

Due  on  Titanium  by  December  16,  11:30  p.m.    

(NO  LATE  PAPERS  WILL  BE  ACCEPTED.    NO  HARD  COPY  NEEDS  TO  BE  TURNED  IN)       The  Ultimate  Commitment:  “We’re  getting  the  Implants!”  

  We  all  want  love  in  our  lives.    However,  as  our  50%  divorce  rate  reminds  us,  even  when  love   seems  at  its  best,  things  can  quickly  fall  apart  –  and  much  else  falls  apart  when  love  is  over.         Imagine  the  possibility  of  committing  to  loving  someone  forever.    The  possibility  may  soon   be  available  to  all  of  us.    Consider  the  following:  A  matching  unique  pair  of  neural  implants   that  release  a  bonding  chemical  like  oxytocin  into  your  brains  when  you  and  your  partner   see  one  another.    The  “love  implants”  could  be  mutually  activated  (“turned  on”)  as  a  part  of   a  wedding  ceremony,  or  whenever  the  couple  determines  they  are  ready  for  the  “ultimate   commitment”.      A  year  waiting  period  from  the  time  of  application  would  help  ensure  that   the  lovers  are  indeed  ready  and  willing  for  this  kind  of  commitment.    Once  the  devices  are   turned  on,  there  is  no  turning  back  –  the  lover’s  attachment  system  will  form  an  ever-­‐ stronger  bond  with  the  other  person.         Your  paper  should  answer  the  following  questions,  giving  greater  weight  to  the  first  two   parts  which  engage  the  theories  discussed  in  our  class:       (i) Would  the  Love  Implant  interfere  with,  support,  or  be  inconsequential  for  romantic  

love?    Explain  by  reference  to  at  least  2  of  the  theorists  we  have  discussed  this   semester.      

(ii) What  impact,  if  any,  is  getting  such  an  implant  likely  to  have  on  your  identity?     Reference  either  Rousseau  or  Nozick  (or  both)  in  your  answer.  

  (iii) Given  the  impact  such  a  device  would  likely  have  on  the  stability  of  families,  should  

the  government  incentivize  its  use  in  any  way?  (e.g.  by  subsidizing  the  device  or   providing  a  tax  break  for  it)  Explain.  

  (iv) Under  what  conditions,  if  any,  would  you  consider  getting  implanted,  and  why?     Instructions:    

• Answer  the  question  in  full  (each  and  every  part  and  in  that  order).   • When  explaining  your  own  view,  formulate  a  clear  thesis  and  support  it  with  

specific  reasons  that  go  beyond  “it’s  seems  that  way  to  me”  or  “in  my  experience”.     Think  of  yourself  as  trying  to  convince  someone  who  disagrees  with  your  viewpoint.  

• You  do  not  need  to  number  your  response  parts,  nor  separate  them  into  parts,   though  you  may  do  so  if  you  like.  

  Good  luck!