David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy and Literature 33 (1):pp. 193-203 (2009)
Claims that pornography cannot be art typically depend on controversial claims about essential value differences (moral, aesthetic) between pornography and art. In this paper, I offer a value-neutral exclusionary claim, showing pornography to be descriptively at odds with art. I then show how my view is an improvement on similar claims made by Jerrold Levinson. Finally I draw parallels between art and pornography and art and advertising as well as show that my view is consistent with our typical usage of the term “pornographic art.”.
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jorn Sonderholm (2008). Having Fun with the Periodic Table: A Counterexample to Rea's Definition of Pornography. Philosophia 36 (2):233-236.
Lori Watson (2010). Pornography. Philosophy Compass 5 (7):535-550.
Christy Mag Uidhir (2009). Why Pornography Can't Be Art. Philosophy and Literature 33 (1):193-203.
Kathleen Kadon Desmond (2011). Ideas About Art. Wiley-Blackwell.
Bence Nanay (2012). Anti-Pornography. In Hans Maes & Jerrold Levinson (eds.), Art and Pornography. Oxford University Press.
Jon Huer (1987). Art, Beauty, and Pornography: A Journey Through American Culture. Prometheus Books.
Hans Maes (2011). Art or Porn: Clear Division or False Dilemma? Philosophy and Literature 35 (1):51-64.
Christopher Bartel (2010). The 'Fine Art' of Pornography? In Dave Monroe (ed.), Porn: Philosophy for Everyone. Wiley-Blackwell. 153--65.
Added to index2009-04-15
Total downloads215 ( #1,577 of 1,004,649 )
Recent downloads (6 months)12 ( #8,823 of 1,004,649 )
How can I increase my downloads?