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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Pornography silences women by undermining their capacity to perform certain speech acts.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Speech act uptake failures caused by social conditions are distinct from silencing caused by a specific communicative act's illocutionary force.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Pornography is one among many social factors shaping linguistic uptake; attributing silencing specifically to it commits a causal overdetermination fallacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rae Langton's illocutionary silencing thesis requires that pornography itself—not merely its social effects—constitutes the disabling of women's speech acts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.J.L. Austin's speech act theory grounds illocutionary force in shared conventional procedures, not in the downstream psychological states of third-party audiences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If pornography silences by shaping male attitudes, the mechanism is perlocutionary, not illocutionary, and perlocutionary effects cannot ground a rights-based silencing claim without proving specific causal harm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Jennifer Hornsby and Langton conflate perlocutionary uptake failure with illocutionary disability, a distinction Austin himself regarded as theoretically decisive.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Some speech acts set conditions that fix the possibility of other speech acts, making certain speech acts possible for some persons and impossible for others.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Pornography sets rules of behavior that inhibit the speech of women.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The speech acts of pornography—performed by those who produce and distribute it—create a climate that undermines women's capacity to perform certain speech acts of their own.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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