Philosophia 36 (2):233-236 (2008)
|Abstract||In a paper from 2001, Michael C. Rea considers the question of what pornography is. First, he examines a number of existing definitions of ‘pornography’ and after having rejected them all, he goes on to present his own preferred definition. In this short paper, I suggest a counterexample to Rea’s definition. In particular, I suggest that there is something that, on the one hand, is pornography according to Rea’s definition, but, on the other hand, is not something that we would intuitively describe as being an instance of pornography.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Rae Langton (2009). Sexual Solipsism: Philosophical Essays on Pornography and Objectification. OUP Oxford.
Lori Watson (2010). Pornography. Philosophy Compass 5 (7):535-550.
Nellie Wieland (2007). Linguistic Authority and Convention in a Speech Act Analysis of Pornography. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (3):435 – 456.
Alisa L. Carse (1999). Pornography's Many Meanings: A Reply to C. M. Concepcion. Hypatia 14 (1):101-111.
Andrew Aberdein (2010). Strange Bedfellows: The Interpenetration of Philosophy and Pornography. In Dave Monroe (ed.), Porn: How to Think with Kink. Wiley-Blackwell.
Peter J. King (2008). No Plaything: Ethical Issues Concerning Child-Pornography. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 11 (3):327 - 345.
Christy Mag Uidhir (2009). Why Pornography Can't Be Art. Philosophy and Literature 33 (1):pp. 193-203.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads59 ( #19,732 of 722,826 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,982 of 722,826 )
How can I increase my downloads?