Churchill Frederick B
Department of History and Philosophy of Science, Goodbody Hall 130, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana 47405, USA.
Hist Philos Life Sci. 2002;24(3-4):391-411. doi: 10.1080/03919710210001714483.
It is commonplace to point out that Alfred Kinsey's taxonomic work on gall wasps provided a methodology for his studies of human sexual behavior. It is equally commonplace to point out that, when researching and presenting his sexual studies, Kinsey's professedly neutral scientific data were constrained by a social agenda. What I have done in this paper is to join these two claims and demonstrate, with particular reference to Kinsey's Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, how his zoology helped guide Kinsey to a naturalistic ethics that, despite contrasts to, shared certain parallel logical failures with the traditional ethics of his critics.
人们常指出，阿尔弗雷德·金赛关于瘿蜂的分类学研究为他对人类性行为的研究提供了一种方法。同样常见的是指出，在研究和呈现他的性学研究时，金赛宣称中立的科学数据受到了社会议程的限制。我在本文中所做的是将这两种观点结合起来，并特别参考金赛的《男性性行为》，展示他的动物学如何帮助金赛形成一种自然主义伦理学，尽管与他的批评者的传统伦理学形成对比，但在某些逻辑失误方面却有相似之处。
