Leonard Peikoff on free will and sexual identity

From the podcast #82, from October 4, 2009, Objectivist philosopher Peikoff answers the question "'Does a person have free will in regard to his or her sexual identity?'"

It's a reasonable-ish piece until he tells us we will likely be able to change our sexual identity in a hundred years time.

Category:

Entertainment

Tags:

• Peikoff
• gay
• straight
• objectivism
• sexual identity
• sexuality
• ex-gay movement
• free will
• changing sexual identity

[daemonesk]

@grantsinmypants2 -- sexual identity is not built up on basic bremises accepted unknowingly, implicitly. That's not what research shows -- research into human development has nothing to say about unconsciously accepted premises. That's now how sexual identity, gender identity, sexual orientation are formed. This is all murk in Peikoff's presentation.

Can I call some of what he says reasonable-ish? Yes, I can. And so can you.

[Ataensic]

I consider myself an objectivist, but this type of thing is where I draw the line on their interpretation of free will.

Whether you like this type of person or that type of person is similar to liking either chocolate cake or apple pie. You just like what you like. When you're a developed adult, your neurobiology is responsible for what you like and don't like in the realm of taste in food and in people.

[markgg1]

I dont care about 'premises' or any other pseudo philosophical bull. Being homophobic is oppression. You are trampling of other peoples right. You have no right over other human beings behaviour, unless they are harming others... Homosexual behaviour hams no one. Infact, they seem to love it ;-)

This man is dangerous.

[TheAquaVelvaMan]

This is not a question for a the science philosophy to answer. This is a question for the science of biology and psychology. I do not at all agree with Dr. Peikoffs view at all. I think it is wrong. In my own opinion, your sexual identity comes from your innate biology . You are simply born with it. There is no choice in the matter because it is given to you at birth. Heterosexuality, homosexuality, has NOTHING to do with your premises but the natural biology you are born with.

[namecyber]

@daemonesk You can see where he's coming from when he uses words like 'error' and 'correct'. Obviously he thinks that straight is the correct way, But I'm biased, I don't like him. He's frightening. I think he sounds like a bully and a thug. He's not a great advert for Objectivism, liberty, etc - which I'm all for.

[grantsinmypants2]

Why is his last point about the future "unreasonable-ish"?

It seems you're trying to take his earlier points and make them into some kind of argument that sexual identity is inborn. Certainly the unsophisticated - who buy into the false alternative between it being either completely inborn or entirely a fully conscious choice - will get that impression when they hear him say anything similar to "no, it's not a choice."

You can't call 1/2 of what he says reasonable, but not the other half.