Difference between revisions of "Natural law"
| [unchecked revision] | [unchecked revision] |
(fast sloppy extention, needs peer review) |
m |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
This fallacy falls under the more inclusive set of fallacies known as ''argumentum ad antiquitam'', or in English an "appeal to tradition" and was commonly employed by Berg and [[The Family]] to characterize sexual impropriety as "natural" on the basis of average ages for puberal developments (i.e. that sexual development often commences prior to the [[age of consent]]). | This fallacy falls under the more inclusive set of fallacies known as ''argumentum ad antiquitam'', or in English an "appeal to tradition" and was commonly employed by Berg and [[The Family]] to characterize sexual impropriety as "natural" on the basis of average ages for puberal developments (i.e. that sexual development often commences prior to the [[age of consent]]). | ||
| − | The argument neglected to note the discrepancy between sexual maturation and psychological maturation and was self-indulgent in naively believing that sating adults urges to have sex with minors | + | The argument neglected to note the discrepancy between sexual maturation and psychological maturation and was self-indulgent in naively believing that sating adults' urges to have sex with minors would not be harmful. |
Revision as of 08:38, 14 April 2005
"Natural law" was an appeal to a common fallacy employed in David Berg's doctrines; the naturalistic fallacy.
This fallacy falls under the more inclusive set of fallacies known as argumentum ad antiquitam, or in English an "appeal to tradition" and was commonly employed by Berg and The Family to characterize sexual impropriety as "natural" on the basis of average ages for puberal developments (i.e. that sexual development often commences prior to the age of consent).
The argument neglected to note the discrepancy between sexual maturation and psychological maturation and was self-indulgent in naively believing that sating adults' urges to have sex with minors would not be harmful.
For more information on this logical fallacy see the following link(s).
