Bella Dea wrote:Nope, I think that without a question the grossness of child pornograpy is universal. At least to those with normal brain function.
If you're right, the grossness is still not going to be a real, mind-independent property that paeodphiles fail to see. It is going to be a relation between ideal observers and acts of paedophilia. It will be like sad music. According to arousalists, the sadness of music is constituted by the fact that ideal listeners react to the music with feelings which are appropriate to instances of sadness. They respond as they would to a sad person, and this is what makes the music 'sad'.
On your view, normal human beings respond to acts of paedophilia or discussions about paedophilia with feeligns which are appropriate tyo instances of grossness. They respond as they would to a slug or a puddle of vomit, and this is what makes the paedophilia (or the discussion of paedophilia) 'gross'.
If you are a normal human being or an ideal observer, I don't think you can
observe these relational properties. You don't hear the sadness in music; the sadness is constituted by the way you respond to the music. Similarly, you are not observing an instance of grossness. The grossness is constituted by the way you feel in response to the thing which you call 'gross'. You are not "observing" anything; you are constituting it.
At least, if you're right that your reaction is the universal reaction, this is what is occuring. But I disagree, of course. Your reaction is not the appropriate reaction; it is the reaction that most people used to have when they heard about gays and lesbians. It is a product of ignorance.
