Does water seek it's own level?

paulaj - Now why, oh why was this on your mind?



From what I'm getting from your post, no. He is not seeking his real level in her unless he marries her.

For one night... he is probably below her and allowing himself to an animal. Don't we all have those days?

Isn't this a copy and paste from a previous post? I can only assume that you think the doctor is 'sinking' to the prostitute's 'level', as a base whore.

My interperetation is that your view is that the doctor is 'debasing' himself. The question is a little vague actually. Can you expand on your position on this issue?

It has been on my mind because someone I know posed this scenario and believes the doctor is greater than know matter what he does, I disagree, at that moment his stature does not overide his actions.

No this is not a copy and paste, if there is another thread like this I did not see it. And yes the doctor is 'debasing' himself and also partaking in an illegal activity.

That was actually a plot line from Law and Order, I assume based on a true story, where a gynocologist raped his female patients, because he was into S & M, and felt like the 'master', because of his status. In fact, there have been many Law and Order plots revolving around the legal responsibilty of doctors. Who says you can't learn things from watching TV?

Bottom line: Illegal is illegal.

Cav

Is he at her level or not?

Morally, professionally, or personally?

How about morally. I say he is still on her level.

Then morally, yes, the doctor is on her level, as he accepted the service, despite it being illegal.

If we're basing morality on observance of laws, those members of the "underground railroad" who helped slaves escape were immoral. I believe this is a rather narrow view.

Good point. I guess laws and morals aren't alway's mutual.

Laws are very frequently downright immoral. They are immoral simply because they are an attempt by one group to regulate the behavior of another when no concievable harm can be done to the legislating group by the "immoral behavior" of the "offending" group.

For instance the legal penalties for recreational drug use. They are justified by assuming the use of recreational drugs leads to crime and other antisocial actions.

By making drugs illegal we (society) raise the price thus subsidizing the purveyers of such drugs making it much more worthwhile to violate other laws and encourage new customers. The drug battles in our cities and the destabilization of Colombia are but a few of the results of such "immoral" laws.

By making prostitution illegal it precludes any attempt to regulate the practice thus magnifying the (real) health risks to society as a whole. A licensed prostitute could easily be subject to the type of inspections that our food sellers, resturant operaters ande meat packers are subject to. With prostitution illegal there is no hope of ever regulating it for the protection of the general public or for the prostitutes and their clients.

Thus I conclude that an "immoral law" usually makes the problem worse that it would be if there were no such law at all. This is what makes it "immoral"

I see "status" as more of an accepted societal standard for each profession. Where we get those opinions of stature appear to be somewhat fluid. Acceptance of certain professions as high or low on societies scale have fluctuated over time.

My point earlier was that at some point, we are all lowlifes. At some point we all seek animalistic leveling. Does that change our overall status in society? Does it mean that is how we see ourselves?

My guess is that it depends on how public it becomes. A doctor seeking out a prostitute is just a doctor seeking to level his anamilistic side. However, when he is a prominant, world reknowned brain surgeon and it hits the front page of every major publication, his status is changed in the mind of the public.

More to the point of psychological studies, is that the way he views himself? Perhaps. But, unless he marries her or does something more substantial than a one night stand, that can't be implied from his limited action.

When two beautiful people marry each other, it is viewed as an equal relationship. When a beautiful woman marries an ugly old man, it must be for his money, and while the man gets praise for having the beautiful woman on his arm, he is seen as a fool for letting her take advantage of him. If a handsome man marries an ugly woman, he must have low self esteem and is leveling himself. (Same as the doctor and the prostitute)

Morally, we would probably like to think he has lowered himself to her level, but how do we react? Rob lowe, after his embarrassing ordeal with underaged girls several years ago is making a comeback. Hugh Grant wasn't really damaged at all by his escapade with a prostitute. So while we would like to take the high minded approach and say the doctor is at her level, in reality we don't then treat those of status as we treat the already percieved moral lowlife.

A pawn and a king reside on the same table on which they play. And when the game is over, they both get put in the same box.

Whether moral or immoral the doctor is not more righteous/honorable at that moment than she.

(squinney, i like your new avatar)

Legally, it depends where you live.

Morally, the doctor is already prostituting his abilities for money at his day job, so I don't see any difference between them anyway, except in the legal and culturally bound spheres of understanding.

it is the doctor seeking her approval, he is the inferior, she has the power, always.