I can understand that argument, because no other animal has made such an impact on Earth as humans in terms of intellectuality, and no animal can produce thought to our level. — dimension72
Do you notice how you’re processing this, though? — Possibility
You’re looking for a purpose and situation to justify the function of covering your body. — Possibility
But can we admit that we cover our bodies as a choice - conscious or otherwise - and NOT a necessity? — Possibility
But can we admit that we cover our bodies as a choice - conscious or otherwise - and NOT a necessity? — Possibility
Sure, people choose to do what they have to do if they want to ___. And they could choose not to, and go without whatever that is. Maybe they choose not to stay alive if killing someone else is the only way to do that.
Of course people are choosing, but that doesn't mean their decisions are arbitrary or without reasons. — Srap Tasmaner
This is important to us, although not objectively necessary, as such. — Possibility
I do not concur with the view that survival is not objectively necessary. If existence is merely a peripheral, subjective concern, then none of this discussion -- and much else -- matters.
The fact that we will cease to exist is what makes existence sine qua non.. If our existence was now and forever more, things would be different. — Bitter Crank
We should be aware that nakedness isn't the same issue for everybody the world over. Some people don't wear clothes. — Bitter Crank
We (first worlders) do cover up ourselves. There's nothing wrong with that; it works for us. Except when it doesn't. — Bitter Crank
Is it to avoid moral ‘shame’ or fear that we insist on clothing? After all, being naked in front of someone else is the most vulnerable a person could ever be. No barriers, no shield, no interface, no pretence. And no weapons, either. Nakedness exposes us to every potential danger that we know: from cold and pain to assault, criticism and rejection. When we are naked, we have nothing to help us deflect or absorb the injury - we must bear it all, physically and emotionally. — Possibility
You assert that ‘clothes are necessary for basic survival’, but many posters here have pointed out that clothes are needed to survive only in some circumstances, not all. There are, in fact, many human experiences in which nakedness is not even a health risk, let alone a risk to survival. Clothes are useful for survival, but not necessary. — Possibility
. (@3017amen - this seems like a good moment for you to chime in...) — Possibility
The non-biblical reason for wearing clothing has more to do with climate than with gender. In the jungles of Africa, clothing is optional for those with dark skin. But in the deserts of the Middle East, clothing is necessary to provide shade from the unfiltered sun. Yet, even "half-naked" Africans typically, but not in all cases, wore loin-cloths to hide their genitals --- though not their breasts. In the middle-east, the desert equivalent of a loin-cloth is a Niqab face-covering, in addition to the shapeless body covering.If it is fear that drives the apparent necessity of clothing, then why the moral judgement? — Possibility
The main aim, however, is a philosophical discussion regarding an apparent perception of clothing as ‘necessary’, and the associated moral judgement against nakedness. — Possibility
clothes are needed to survive only in some circumstances, not all — Possibility
but because Adam and Eve now possessed knowledge that - gained by awareness (their eyes were opened) - without any practical knowledge as such, and from that alone acted in moral judgement. It isn’t that they ‘knew’ that nakedness was bad, but that they determined it was bad from their initial experience. What they ‘knew’ was only that they were naked, that they felt vulnerable, and that they could respond. The how or why - knowledge gained only by experience over time, which was to be developed over thousands of years - was irrelevant to Adam and Eve in determining their interaction with the world. It seems to me that, for this reason, ‘God’ was unhappy. — Possibility
So your statement that the reason nakedness is bad is because ‘most people think nakedness is bad’ only seeks to validate this error in judgement made by Adam and Eve, in an argumentum ad populum. The truth is that many people rather feel that nakedness is potentially bad in many situations, but it doesn’t follow from this feeling that nakedness is necessarily and inherently ‘bad’. The will to cover up is both problematic and hypothetical, if you think about it. — Possibility
I want to clarify here that I’m not making an argument for doing away with clothing, as a rule. My point is simply to be aware that this will to cover up is neither necessary nor inherent to human experience. I don’t believe an experience of nakedness should necessarily be subject to moral judgement, but rather evaluated on practicality and potential health risks. That we continue to consider nakedness a moral issue seems to me a function of this inherent human fear of feeling vulnerable. Of course, I could argue that much of morality is a function of this deep-seated fear, but that may be another discussion. — Possibility
With reference to the Hijab: there is covering up nakedness, there is concealing identity, and then there is protecting private property. These are separate issues. The potential threat of ‘negative ethical consequences’ still does not make this will to cover up necessary. — Possibility
I would liken it to bathing. It is not strictly necessary for survival, although it certainly can play a contributing role to a longer life in most environments. It is also not strictly necessary for membership in a community, although its absence here is a much greater liability. — Pro Hominem
How did it come to pass that they "determined it (nakedness) was bad"[/i] if not by some criterion of morality? In other words, they had, at the very least, acquired some knowledge of morality, whatever system of morality it was that considers nakedness as immoral. — TheMadFool
I'm making an argument to the best explanation. There are no reasons other than a moral one why nudism isn't allowed during weather conditions perfect for some naked frolicking at the beach or wherever one fancies. — TheMadFool
You have a theory but I don't know how well it'll stand up to careful scrutiny. I mean, look, there are tribes in the tropics like in the Amazon and African rainforests who don't wear any clothes at all and then, moving toward the higher latitudes we have Eskimos in the Arctic who are, well, dressed in many layers of clothing from head to toe. What explains this pattern? Can your theory that we're fearful and feel vulnerable in a psychological sense, as you seem to be implying, explain this phenomenon? The best explanation seems to be that people aren't afraid of nakedness but they are afraid of hypothermia. For your theory to be reasonable, peoples everywhere, in the tropics, in the mid-latitudes and in the frigid zones, should have a clothing industry at some scale. This isn't the case. — TheMadFool
If you think it's vulnerability and the associated fear that causes us to wear clothes then it follows that the Hijab is the perfect design to address that vulnerability and allay the fear that comes with it. — TheMadFool
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.