Philosophy 220 Consequentialism and Pornography Consequences of Pornography

  • Slides: 10
Download presentation
Philosophy 220 Consequentialism and Pornography

Philosophy 220 Consequentialism and Pornography

Consequences of Pornography • The popularity of consequentialist thinking is demonstrated by the reliance

Consequences of Pornography • The popularity of consequentialist thinking is demonstrated by the reliance of the Meese commission on broadly consequentialist reasoning to determine if pornography should be censored. • When evaluating their reasoning, we need to consider carefully the relationship between the activities or behaviors and the claimed consequences.

In Their Sights • Charged by then president Reagan, the Meese commission identified and

In Their Sights • Charged by then president Reagan, the Meese commission identified and evaluated the possible consequences of the availability and use of 4 different forms of pornography. 1. 2. 3. 4. Violent Non-violent, but degrading Non-violent and non-degrading Child pornography

The Problem of Causation • As the commission report notes, specifying a causal link

The Problem of Causation • As the commission report notes, specifying a causal link is a very complicated process. • There a number of forms of causal connection to consider. • There is also the problem of correlation. • Multiple causation is another complicating factor.

Conclusions? • Violent Pornography: studies suggest a causal link between exposure and aggressive behavior

Conclusions? • Violent Pornography: studies suggest a causal link between exposure and aggressive behavior towards women but, “a link between aggressive behavior toward women and sexual violence…requires assumptions not found in the experimental evidence. We see no reason…not to make these assumptions” (94 c 1). • Non-Violent but Degrading: “The evidence…is more tentative, but supports the conclusion that the material we describe as degrading bears some causal relationship to the attitudinal changes we have previously identified” (95 c 2). • Non-Violent and Non-Degrading: though there is no evidence of a causal link with sexual violence, “does not answer the question of whether such materials might not themselves simply for some other reason constitute a harm” (96 c 2). For example, displaying offensive behavior or encouraging promiscuity.

Does it Add Up? • Nadine Strossen, among many others, has serious reservations about

Does it Add Up? • Nadine Strossen, among many others, has serious reservations about the reasoning and conclusions of the Meese commission. • Strossen goes further to argue that even if the Meese commission is right about the consequences of the broad social availability of pornographic materials, censorship would not solve the problems identified.

What’s Being Assumed? • According to Strossen, reasoning like that of the Meese Commission

What’s Being Assumed? • According to Strossen, reasoning like that of the Meese Commission makes three dubious assumptions. 1. Exposure to sexist, violent imagery leads to sexist, violent behavior. 2. Suppression of pornography would significantly reduce exposure to sexist, violent imagery. 3. Censorship could significantly reduce exposure to pornography.

Monkey See, Monkey Do? • There are four types of evidence supporting the link

Monkey See, Monkey Do? • There are four types of evidence supporting the link relied upon by the Meese Commission. o Research Data on attitudinal effects (100 c 2). o Correlational Data on availability of materials. o Anecdotal Data from sex offenders (102 c 1). o Research Data on sex offenders (104 c 1). • Strossen notes in addition that not even the advocates of censorship think that these sources of evidence prove the point.

Is Porn the Problem? • Strossen goes then questions the supposition that pornography is

Is Porn the Problem? • Strossen goes then questions the supposition that pornography is the most source of the questionable imagery. • As we’ve already noted, our popular culture is full of sexually explicit imagery. • Evidence suggests that accepting the rape myth is just as likely to result from watching soap operas as it is from pornography (105 c 1).

Is Censorship Effective? • Strossen’s final point is that there is good historical reason

Is Censorship Effective? • Strossen’s final point is that there is good historical reason to doubt that censorship would serve as an effective limit to exposure to pornography. • Data suggests to the contrary that censorship would have the effect of increasing receptiveness to the imagery being censored (105 c 2).