Wisdom of repugnance
The
wisdom of repugnance expresses the belief or concept that an
intuitive (or "deep-seated") negative response to some thing, idea or practice should be interpreted as
evidence for the
intrinsically harmful or
evil character of that thing. Furthermore, it refers to the notion that
wisdom may manifest itself in feelings of
disgust towards anything which lacks "
goodness" or wisdom, though these feelings may not be immediately explicable through
reason. The controversial concept has been characterised as a "disgust-based
morality" and is regarded by many as
pseudoscientific and an example of the
naturalistic fallacy.
The term was coined in
1997 by
Leon Kass, chairman of the
President's Council on Bioethics, in an eponymous chapter of his book
Life, Liberty, and the Defense of Dignity. In the chapter, Kass stated that disgust was not an argument
per se, but went on to say that "in crucial cases...repugnance is the emotional expression of deep wisdom, beyond reason's power fully to articulate it."
The term remains largely confined to discussions of
bioethics, and is somewhat related to the term "yuck factor". However, unlike the latter, it is used almost exclusively by those who accept its underlying premise; i.e., that repugnance does, in fact, indicate wisdom. It is thus often viewed as
loaded language, and is primarily used by certain
bioconservatives to justify their position.
The
wisdom of repugnance is often used to justify so-called "knee-jerk" negative reactions to
cloning (particularly of
humans),
genetic engineering, and other contentious subjects. One who adheres to this thesis may consider it unnecessary ("in crucial cases") to examine an issue logically, or to debate dissenting arguments.
The term has since migrated to other controversies, such as
same-sex marriage,
abortion,
pornography,
alternative sexualities, and
cannabis rescheduling. In all cases, it expresses the view that one's "gut reaction" is sufficient to discredit a sufficiently contentious issue.
The wisdom of repugnance has been widely criticized, both as an example of a
fallacious appeal to emotion and for an underlying premise which seems to reject
rationalism. Although mainstream science concedes that a sense of
disgust most likely
evolved as a useful defense mechanism (e.g. in that it tends to prevent or prohibit potentially harmful behaviour such as
incest,
cannibalism, and
coprophagia), social psychologists question whether the instinct can serve any moral or logical value when removed from the
context in which it was originally acquired.
Some critics such as
Martha Nussbaum explicitly oppose the concept of a disgust-based
morality. Nussbaum notes that disgust has been used throughout history as a justification for persecution. For example, at various times
racism,
antisemitism,
sexism, and
homophobia have all been driven by popular revulsion.
Other critics base their criticism on a broader defense of rationalism.
Stephen J. Gould, in his 1997 book
Full House, remarked that "our prejudices often overwhelm our limited information. [They] are so venerable, so reflexive, so much a part of our second nature, that we never stop to recognize their status as social decisions with radical alternatives - and we view them instead as given and obvious truths."
Most critics of Kass contend that he has committed the
naturalistic fallacy, and that his thesis is
pseudoscientific and
irrational, due to its deference to emotion over reason. His contention has also been criticized as
unfalsifiable, since it does not specifically describe what constitutes a "crucial case", nor why reactions of people should differ when confronted by the same issue.
Kass' real motives for proposing and supporting the concept are also brought into question as a result of his close ties to conservative politicians, and his personal opposition to
feminism,
gay rights,
abortion and other socio-political issues. The wisdom of repugnance has been criticized as an attempt to
politicize science, and to justify irrational ideological objections to
scientific progress and research.
*
Anti-intellectualism*
Appeal to emotion*
Bioconservatism*
Lysenkoism*
Naturalistic fallacy*
Truthiness* Kass, Leon.
The Wisdom of Repugnance*
Hughes, James.
Repugnance Isn't Wisdom * Parisi, Mike.
A critique of Leon Kass* Nussbaum, Martha C..
Danger to Human Dignity: the Revival of Disgust and Shame in the Law* Farr Ago News.
No Wisdom in Repugnance* Bloom, Paul.
To Urgh Is Human* Horgan, John.
The Politics of Science
