Just Love is a book by Margaret Farley that was based on the creation of a new framework for sexual ethics, and this was done through a Western viewpoint. The first thing Farley did was set out the history of sexuality and how it had been interpreted throughout time. After laying out the background for her argument, she then got into the actual claim of the book and support for that claim. Farley provided some context for and clarified what sexuality is and then described how this could possibly provide flourishing as the telos of the moral life of human beings. She then mapped out the meaning of sexuality and what the goal of sex could be, if gender matters, and also how the defined sexuality could be personified. This was where her claim
…show more content…
These answers given in the book can be classified based on the theologians studied. When considering the first question studied in class, which was the relationship between faith and reason, Farley tended to side with the conjunctive view of that relationship. She agreed with John Paul II in the fact that faith and reason needed to work together and that both of those things must also come from God. This became clear in her discussion of love and emotions. As she stated, “Emotions contain not only an affective element, but a cognitive one,” (202). When attempting to understand a person’s emotions, their feelings and perception must be considered. The feelings and perception correlated with faith and reason, respectively. Faith was based on feelings, whereas perception was based on the reasoning behind something. Farley went on to declare that “Despite the utter importance of knowledge in relation to love, our loves need not be limited by our understanding of their objects” (203). People must use their ability to reason to somewhat understand love, but faith could reach past the reason so that love could have been truly understood. This all agreed with John Paul II’s view that faith can overcome reason under certain circumstances to be able to understand
These answers given in the book can be classified based on the theologians studied. When considering the first question studied in class, which was the relationship between faith and reason, Farley tended to side with the conjunctive view of that relationship. She agreed with John Paul II in the fact that faith and reason needed to work together and that both of those things must also come from God. This became clear in her discussion of love and emotions. As she stated, “Emotions contain not only an affective element, but a cognitive one,” (202). When attempting to understand a person’s emotions, their feelings and perception must be considered. The feelings and perception correlated with faith and reason, respectively. Faith was based on feelings, whereas perception was based on the reasoning behind something. Farley went on to declare that “Despite the utter importance of knowledge in relation to love, our loves need not be limited by our understanding of their objects” (203). People must use their ability to reason to somewhat understand love, but faith could reach past the reason so that love could have been truly understood. This all agreed with John Paul II’s view that faith can overcome reason under certain circumstances to be able to understand