Abstract
The authors argue that Lee and George (hereafter, L/G) use a reductionist anthropology and ethical method to defend a classicist approach to absolute sexual norms. After describing Lonergan's understanding of scotosis, which can distort one's insight into ethical theory and ethical issues, the article demonstrates this distortion in L/G's sexual anthropology. It further argues that, in formulating their sexual anthropology, L/G fail to address the significance of sexual orientation, and that their method inadequately integrates human experience and reason as sources of moral knowledge.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.