There is a longstanding and widely held view, often associated with Catholicism, that intrinsically nonprocreative human sex acts are intrinsically immoral. Some philosophers who hold this view, such as Edward Feser, claim that they can defend the view on purely philosophical grounds by relying on the perverted faculty argument. This paper argues that Feser's defense of the perverted faculty argument does not work because Feser fails to recognize the full implications of the species-dependence of natural goodness. By drawing on the work of Peter Geach and Philippa Foot, this paper presents a view of natural goodness that adequately accounts for the species-dependence of such goodness. Using this adequate account, the paper argues that at least some intrinsically nonprocreative human sex acts contribute to human flourishing.

中文翻译：

---

自然善良、性和变态的教师论点

有一种长期且广泛持有的观点，通常与天主教有关，即本质上不具有生育能力的人类性行为本质上是不道德的。一些持有这种观点的哲学家，例如爱德华·费瑟（Edward Feser），声称他们可以依靠歪曲的教师论点，在纯粹的哲学基础上为这种观点辩护。本文认为，Feser 对变态教师论点的辩护是行不通的，因为 Feser 未能认识到自然善的物种依赖性的全部含义。通过借鉴 Peter Geach 和 Philippa Foot 的工作，本文提出了一种自然善的观点，充分解释了这种善的物种依赖性。使用这个充分的说明，该论文认为，至少一些本质上非生殖性的人类性行为有助于人类的繁荣。