"He found Murphy's discussion of laws about homosexuality interesting, but questioned whether Murphy provided "anything which is deeply grounded in a well thought-out philosophy of law".He also questioned whether Murphy was right to devote attention to the issue of whether it is possible or desirable to change a person's sexual orientation and noted that, "Murphy seems to have virtually no time or interest in Freud's work, even though a mere twenty years ago the Freudian etiological analysis of homosexuality was considered really significant."