Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Defenders of performative accounts need not think that on... — Carmelics
    Home/Forgiveness & Mercy
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Defenders of performative accounts need not think that only speech acts can fulfill the performative functions of forgiving.

    Forgiveness & Mercy
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • Cognate communicative acts, gestures, and facial expressions may achieve the same result as utterances of "I forgive you".
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Austin's speech act theory grounds illocutionary force in conventional linguistic procedures, not in mere expressive behavior.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Extending performative accounts to non-linguistic acts dissolves the criterial distinctness that makes performatives philosophically tractable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without linguistic conventionality, there is no principled basis for distinguishing a forgiving gesture from a mere expression of resumed goodwill.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Jeffrie Murphy argues forgiveness requires an internal moral transaction that overcomes resentment for the right reasons, not a communicative act of any kind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If gestures and expressions can perform forgiveness, the account collapses into an attitudinal view, undermining the distinctiveness performativists claim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Forgiveness & Mercy

    Related

    Austin's speech act theory grounds illocutionary force in conventional linguisti...Cognate communicative acts, gestures, and facial expressions may achieve the sam...Extending performative accounts to non-linguistic acts dissolves the criterial d...If gestures and expressions can perform forgiveness, the account collapses into ...
    +2 moreShow less
    Jeffrie Murphy argues forgiveness requires an internal moral transaction that ov...Without linguistic conventionality, there is no principled basis for distinguish...

    Similar

    Defenders of performative accounts need not hold that acts of forgiven...87%The language of forgiveness is quite often put to a performatory use, ...77%Cognate communicative acts, gestures, and facial expressions may achie...74%For an act of forgiveness to have positive moral status, the victim mu...73%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: forgiveness
    Swinburne (1989)
    View source passageHide passage
    Three clarifications about performative accounts are in order. First, one need not think that performative forgiveness possesses only one kind of illocutionary force. Pettigrove (2004a, 2012), for example, argues that “I forgive you” can function as both a behabitive and commissive. Some hold that it can function as a behabitive, commissive, and declarative (Warmke 2016b). Second, defenders of performative accounts need not hold that acts of forgiveness qua performative, must always function in the same way, for it might be that even if “the language of forgiveness is quite often put to a perf...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The passage explicitly states that defenders of performative accounts need not think only speech acts can fulfill the performative functions of forgiving, and supports this by noting that cognate communicative acts, gestures, and facial expressions may achieve the same result.

    Confidence: Explicitly stated as the third clarification.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit