 Welcome to
|
|
athlon processor Athlon Processor 80386 Related Topics: athlon processor AMD Athlon processor CPU memory PC XP intel AMD Athlon information ram pictures hardware software Slot A computer reviews 64 Devices Newegg.com video card Newegg Microsoft networking overclocking chips athlon 64 x2 review Product identification Tom computers pinouts X2 Advanced cooling X86 microprocessor Micro support |
Athlon Processor 80386 athlon processor.Athlon Processor 80386 athlon processor InformationMark Wicclair argues that we should be very wary about the censorship of pornography,even if pornography, as Helen Longino defines it, exists. In order to fully understand Wicclair's reason for being wary of the censorship of pornography it is important that we use Helen Longino's definition of pornography. Helen Longino defines pornography as "[the] verbal or pictoral explicit representations of sexual behavior that...have as a distinguishing characteristic 'the degrading and demeaning portrayal of the role and status of the human female...as a mere sexual object to be exploited and manipulated sexually (p.43)." Helen Longino's definition can be used as the basis of numerous arguments dealing with pornography. In this paper, I will deal with only one controversial aspect of pornography. That aspect is the censorship of pornography. Although Wicclair raises several reasons for being wary of the censorship of pornography, I will discuss only two of those objections in this paper. The first reason Wicclair gives for his claim that we should be wary about the censorship of pornography is that negative side effects are likely to occur if pornography is censored. Wicclair focuses his argument on the slippery slope effect, which he claims is a negative effect of the censoring of pornography. In this context, the slippery slope effect is defined by Wicclair as "...a serious risk that once any censorship is allowed, the power to censor will, over time, expand in unintended and undesirable directions (p.382)." This definition along with "...the fact that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to formulate unequivocal and unambiguous criteria for censorship (Wicclair p. 382)," Wicclair makes the conclusion that "[t]he slippery slope effect will eventually...suppress the rights, interests, and values of others (p.382)." I agree with Wicclair's first reason for his argument against the censorship of pornography. I also believe that the censorship of pornography will cause the slippery slope effect. Because the slippery slope effect is extremely difficult to stop once it has been started, I believe the censorship of pornography will lead to the suppression of many freedoms of expression. When many freedoms of expression are suppressed then censorship no longer effects just pornography in Longino's sense. Therefore, I believe that by censoring pornography citizens of American will most likely have less expressive liberty. I also believe that once Longino's definition of pornography is censored, the slippery slope effect will continually occur, as its name implies. Thus, the argument of censoring pornography as Longino defines it would cease to exist and the argument of censoring pornography as a less explicit definition than Longino's would then take precedence. I believe that the redefining of pornography would continue to occur allowing new censorship arguments to rise. This snowball effect (the slippery slope effect) will eventually impact numerous aspects of American life that were not intended to be effected by the original argument for censoring pornography. Though I could give several examples that redefining pornography eventually effects American life, I will give only two examples: education and economy. First, continually redefining pornography will eventually lead to the censorship of education because pornographic material, even as Longino defines it, is discussed and visually presented in most higher educational institutions. Many college courses could not be taught if it were not for the liberty to openly discuss and watch pornography and all its aspects. If we begin to censor pornography, then the some aspects of the educational system will eventually disappear, such as certain health courses, and students in higher education will be slighted. Second, if pornography continues to be redefined the economy will be impacted. With the slippery slope effect, the definition of pornography will become so strict that many advertisements, movies, and art could not be displayed. The censorship of pornography in the television industry alone could lead to the loss of billions of dollars. More importantly, many artists and photographers who depict certain sexual scenes may be put out of work. So, that is why I believe the slippery slope effect will keep redefining pornography and allowing for the argument of censorship to encroach on many aspects of American life. A second reason Wicclair gives for his argument that we should be wary of censoring pornography is "that exposure to pornography has a cathartic effect and that it therefore produces a net reduction in harm to women (Wicclair p.383)." Wicclair further explains [t]his claim [the cathartic claim] is based upon two assumptions, neither of which has proven to be false: (1) Men who are not already violence-prone are more likely to be 'turned off' than to be 'turned on by depiction's of rape, brutality, dismemberment, etc. (2) For men in the later category, exposure to pornography can function as a substitute for actually causing harm (Wicclair p. 383). This quote explains Wicclair's definition of the cathartic effect in the context of pornography, although the cathartic effect can be applied to many aspects of life. I agree with Wicclair's second reason for why we should be wary of censoring pornography. I believe that people who are not mentally and physically attracted to violence are not mentally or physically attracted to depiction's of violence in pornography. In addition, I believe that violent depictions in pornography act as an outlet for those people who are attracted physically and mentally to violent depiction's in pornography. In other words, I too believe in the cathartic effect. I believe it is important to understand that the only reason an object or idea should be censored is if that object or idea violates an American law, such as the first amendment to the constitution. Although advocates of censorship believe that the "...censorship of pornography is a legitimate means of preventing harm to women (Wicclair, p. 383)" and the fact there are documented cases of pornography leading to violent crime, I believe laws censoring pornography, as Longino defines it, should not be made. I believe this because by making censorship laws for pornography, as Longino defines it, a citizens rights and liberties will be infringed upon instead of being protected. Laws are made in America for many reasons, but for the most part, they are made to protect the rights and liberties of a citizen, which are outlined by the constitution, and these laws are made with the majority of citizens in mind. By making censorship laws for pornography, citizens will no longer have the liberty to read, use, or watch whatever they choose. The first amendment right, which includes freedom of speech, may be infringed upon. More importantly, I believe it is invalid to make censorship laws for pornography just because a hundred or even a thousand cases of violent pornographic rape scenes were acted out. It is most likely that those people involved in those cases will still act out violent depiction's of rape once pornography is censored. Therefore, we should be wary about censoring pornography because it will only hinder our rights and liberties and it will not prohibit violent rape scenes from being depicted. That is why I agree with Wicclair's second reason for being wary of censoring pornography and believe we should be careful in the pornography censorship laws we make because they will not necessarily protect our rights and liberties as citizens. In this paper, I have shown that Mark Wicclair believes the slippery slope effect will greatly impact American life because the slippery slope effect will lead to the constant redefining of pornography. I have also shown that the cathartic effect is a valid argument for why we should be wary about the censorship of pornography because it shows that censorship laws will not necessarily prohibit violent depictions of rape from being acted out and that our rights and liberties, such as the first amendment, will be infringed upon. I have supported those reasons with my own beliefs and logical reasoning. Thus, making both the slippery slope effect and the cathartic effect valid reasons for why Wicclair and myself believe we should be wary of censoring pornography. It is essential to ask whether or not the issue impedes on an American value or violates a law. I have shown in this paper, through Wicclair's reasons as well as my own, that we should be wary about the censorship of pornography.Mark Wicclair argues that we should be very wary about the censorship of pornography, even if pornography, as Helen Longino defines it, exists. In order to fully understand Wicclair's reason for being wary of the censorship of pornography it is important that we use Helen Longino's definition of pornography. Helen Longino defines pornography as "[the] verbal or pictoral explicit representations of sexual behavior that...have as a distinguishing characteristic 'the degrading and demeaning portrayal of the role and status of the human female...as a mere sexual object to be exploited and manipulated sexually (p.43)." Helen Longino's definition can be used as the basis of numerous arguments dealing with pornography. In this paper, I will deal with only one controversial aspect of pornography. That aspect is the censorship of pornography. Although Wicclair raises several reasons for being wary of the censorship of pornography, I will discuss only two of those objections in this paper. The first reason Wicclair gives for his claim that we should be wary about the censorship of pornography is that negative side effects are likely to occur if pornography is censored. Wicclair focuses his argument on the slippery slope effect, which he claims is a negative effect of the censoring of pornography. In this context, the slippery slope effect is defined by Wicclair as "...a serious risk that once any censorship is allowed, the power to censor will, over time, expand in unintended and undesirable directions (p.382)." This definition along with "...the fact that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to formulate unequivocal and unambiguous criteria for censorship (Wicclair p. 382)," Wicclair makes the conclusion that "[t]he slippery slope effect will eventually...suppress the rights, interests, and values of others (p.382)." I agree with Wicclair's first reason for his argument against the censorship of pornography. I also believe that the censorship of pornography will cause the slippery slope effect. Because the slippery slope effect is extremely difficult to stop once it has been started, I believe the censorship of pornography will lead to the suppression of many freedoms of expression. When many freedoms of expression are suppressed then censorship no longer effects just pornography in Longino's sense. Therefore, I believe that by censoring pornography citizens of American will most likely have less expressive liberty. I also believe that once Longino's definition of pornography is censored, the slippery slope effect will continually occur, as its name implies. Thus, the argument of censoring pornography as Longino defines it would cease to exist and the argument of censoring pornography as a less explicit definition than Longino's would then take precedence. I believe that the redefining of pornography would continue to occur allowing new censorship arguments to rise. This snowball effect (the slippery slope effect) will eventually impact numerous aspects of American life that were not intended to be effected by the original argument for censoring pornography. Though I could give several examples that redefining pornography eventually effects American life, I will give only two examples: education and economy. First, continually redefining pornography will eventually lead to the censorship of education because pornographic material, even as Longino defines it, is discussed and visually presented in most higher educational institutions. Many college courses could not be taught if it were not for the liberty to openly discuss and watch pornography and all its aspects. If we begin to censor pornography, then the some aspects of the educational system will eventually disappear, such as certain health courses, and students in higher education will be slighted. Second, if pornography continues to be redefined the economy will be impacted. With the slippery slope effect, the definition of pornography will become so strict that many advertisements, movies, and art could not be displayed. The censorship of pornography in the television industry alone could lead to the loss of billions of dollars. More importantly, many artists and photographers who depict certain sexual scenes may be put out of work. So, that is why I believe the slippery slope effect will keep redefining pornography and allowing for the argument of censorship to encroach on many aspects of American life. A second reason Wicclair gives for his argument that we should be wary of censoring pornography is "that exposure to pornography has a cathartic effect and that it therefore produces a net reduction in harm to women (Wicclair p.383)." Wicclair further explains [t]his claim [the cathartic claim] is based upon two assumptions, neither of which has proven to be false: (1) Men who are not already violence-prone are more likely to be 'turned off' than to be 'turned on by depiction's of rape, brutality, dismemberment, etc. (2) For men in the later category, exposure to pornography can function as a substitute for actually causing harm (Wicclair p. 383). This quote explains Wicclair's definition of the cathartic effect in the context of pornography, although the cathartic effect can be applied to many aspects of life. I agree with Wicclair's second reason for why we should be wary of censoring pornography. I believe that people who are not mentally and physically attracted to violence are not mentally or physically attracted to depiction's of violence in pornography. In addition, I believe that violent depictions in pornography act as an outlet for those people who are attracted physically and mentally to violent depiction's in pornography. In other words, I too believe in the cathartic effect. I believe it is important to understand that the only reason an object or idea should be censored is if that object or idea violates an American law, such as the first amendment to the constitution. Although advocates of censorship believe that the "...censorship of pornography is a legitimate means of preventing harm to women (Wicclair, p. 383)" and the fact there are documented cases of pornography leading to violent crime, I believe laws censoring pornography, as Longino defines it, should not be made. I believe this because by making censorship laws for pornography, as Longino defines it, a citizens rights and liberties will be infringed upon instead of being protected. Laws are made in America for many reasons, but for the most part, they are made to protect the rights and liberties of a citizen, which are outlined by the constitution, and these laws are made with the majority of citizens in mind. By making censorship laws for pornography, citizens will no longer have the liberty to read, use, or watch whatever they choose. The first amendment right, which includes freedom of speech, may be infringed upon. More importantly, I believe it is invalid to make censorship laws for pornography just because a hundred or even a thousand cases of violent pornographic rape scenes were acted out. It is most likely that those people involved in those cases will still act out violent depiction's of rape once pornography is censored. Therefore, we should be wary about censoring pornography because it will only hinder our rights and liberties and it will not prohibit violent rape scenes from being depicted. That is why I agree with Wicclair's second reason for being wary of censoring pornography and believe we should be careful in the pornography censorship laws we make because they will not necessarily protect our rights and liberties as citizens. In this paper, I have shown that Mark Wicclair believes the slippery slope effect will greatly impact American life because the slippery slope effect will lead to the constant redefining of pornography. I have also shown that the cathartic effect is a valid argument for why we should be wary about the censorship of pornography because it shows that censorship laws will not necessarily prohibit violent depictions of rape from being acted out and that our rights and liberties, such as the first amendment, will be infringed upon. I have supported those reasons with my own beliefs and logical reasoning. Thus, making both the slippery slope effect and the cathartic effect valid reasons for why Wicclair and myself believe we should be wary of censoring pornography. It is essential to ask whether or not the issue impedes on an American value or violates a law. I have shown in this paper, through Wicclair's reasons as well as my own, that we should be wary about the censorship of pornography.Mark Wicclair argues that we should be very wary about the censorship of pornography, even if pornography, as Helen Longino defines it, exists. In order to fully understand Wicclair's reason for being wary of the censorship of pornography it is important that we use Helen Longino's definition of pornography. Helen Longino defines pornography as "[the] verbal or pictoral explicit representations of sexual behavior that...have as a distinguishing characteristic 'the degrading and demeaning portrayal of the role and status of the human female...as a mere sexual object to be exploited and manipulated sexually (p.43)." Helen Longino's definition can be used as the basis of numerous arguments dealing with pornography. In this paper, I will deal with only one controversial aspect of pornography. That aspect is the censorship of pornography. Although Wicclair raises several reasons for being wary of the censorship of pornography, I will discuss only two of those objections in this paper. The first reason Wicclair gives for his claim that we should be wary about the censorship of pornography is that negative side effects are likely to occur if pornography is censored. Wicclair focuses his argument on the slippery slope effect, which he claims is a negative effect of the censoring of pornography. In this context, the slippery slope effect is defined by Wicclair as "...a serious risk that once any censorship is allowed, the power to censor will, over time, expand in unintended and undesirable directions (p.382)." This definition along with "...the fact that it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to formulate unequivocal and unambiguous criteria for censorship (Wicclair p. 382)," Wicclair makes the conclusion that "[t]he slippery slope effect will eventually...suppress the rights, interests, and values of others (p.382)." I agree with Wicclair's first reason for his argument against the censorship of pornography. I also believe that the censorship of pornography will cause the slippery slope effect. Because the slippery slope effect is extremely difficult to stop once it has been started, I believe the censorship of pornography will lead to the suppression of many freedoms of expression. When many freedoms of expression are suppressed then censorship no longer effects just pornography in Longino's sense. Therefore, I believe that by censoring pornography citizens of American will most likely have less expressive liberty. I also believe that once Longino's definition of pornography is censored, the slippery slope effect will continually occur, as its name implies. Thus, the argument of censoring pornography as Longino defines it would cease to exist and the argument of censoring pornography as a less explicit definition than Longino's would then take precedence. I believe that the redefining of pornography would continue to occur allowing new censorship arguments to rise. This snowball effect (the slippery slope effect) will eventually impact numerous aspects of American life that were not intended to be effected by the original argument for censoring pornography. Though I could give several examples that redefining pornography eventually effects American life, I will give only two examples: education and economy. First, continually redefining pornography will eventually lead to the censorship of education because pornographic material, even as Longino defines it, is discussed and visually presented in most higher educational institutions. Many college courses could not be taught if it were not for the liberty to openly discuss and watch pornography and all its aspects. If we begin to censor pornography, then the some aspects of the educational system will eventually disappear, such as certain health courses, and students in higher education will be slighted. Second, if pornography continues to be redefined the economy will be impacted. With the slippery slope effect, the definition of pornography will become so strict that many advertisements, movies, and art could not be displayed. The censorship of pornography in the television industry alone could lead to the loss of billions of dollars. More importantly, many artists and photographers who depict certain sexual scenes may be put out of work. So, that is why I believe the slippery slope effect will keep redefining pornography and allowing for the argument of censorship to encroach on many aspects of American life. A second reason Wicclair gives for his argument that we should be wary of censoring pornography is "that exposure to pornography has a cathartic effect and that it therefore produces a net reduction in harm to women (Wicclair p.383)." Wicclair further explains [t]his claim [the cathartic claim] is based upon two assumptions, neither of which has proven to be false: (1) Men who are not already violence-prone are more likely to be 'turned off' than to be 'turned on by depiction's of rape, brutality, dismemberment, etc. (2) For men in the later category, exposure to pornography can function as a substitute for actually causing harm (Wicclair p. 383). This quote explains Wicclair's definition of the cathartic effect in the context of pornography, although the cathartic effect can be applied to many aspects of life. I agree with Wicclair's second reason for why we should be wary of censoring pornography. I believe that people who are not mentally and physically attracted to violence are not mentally or physically attracted to depiction's of violence in pornography. In addition, I believe that violent depictions in pornography act as an outlet for those people who are attracted physically and mentally to violent depiction's in pornography. In other words, I too believe in the cathartic effect. I believe it is important to understand that the only reason an object or idea should be censored is if that object or idea violates an American law, such as the first amendment to the constitution. Although advocates of censorship believe that the "...censorship of pornography is a legitimate means of preventing harm to women (Wicclair, p. 383)" and the fact there are documented cases of pornography leading to violent crime, I believe laws censoring pornography, as Longino defines it, should not be made. I believe this because by making censorship laws for pornography, as Longino defines it, a citizens rights and liberties will be infringed upon instead of being protected. Laws are made in America for many reasons, but for the most part, they are made to protect the rights and liberties of a citizen, which are outlined by the constitution, and these laws are made with the majority of citizens in mind. By making censorship laws for pornography, citizens will no longer have the liberty to read, use, or watch whatever they choose. The first amendment right, which includes freedom of speech, may be infringed upon. More importantly, I believe it is invalid to make censorship laws for pornography just because a hundred or even a thousand cases of violent pornographic rape scenes were acted out. It is most likely that those people involved in those cases will still act out violent depiction's of rape once pornography is censored. Therefore, we should be wary about censoring pornography because it will only hinder our rights and liberties and it will not prohibit violent rape scenes from being depicted. That is why I agree with Wicclair's second reason for being wary of censoring pornography and believe we should be careful in the pornography censorship laws we make because they will not necessarily protect our rights and liberties as citizens. In this paper, I have shown that Mark Wicclair believes the slippery slope effect will greatly impact American life because the slippery slope effect will lead to the constant redefining of pornography. I have also shown that the cathartic effect is a valid argument for why we should be wary about the censorship of pornography because it shows that censorship laws will not necessarily prohibit violent depictions of rape from being acted out and that our rights and liberties, such as the first amendment, will be infringed upon. I have supported those reasons with my own beliefs and logical reasoning. Thus, making both the slippery slope effect and the cathartic effect valid reasons for why Wicclair and myself believe we should be wary of censoring pornography. It is essential to ask whether or not the issue impedes on an American value or violates a law. I have shown in this paper, through Wicclair's reasons as well as my own, that we should be wary about the censorship of pornography. Bibliography Brock, Dan W. "Voluntary Active Euthanasia: An Overview and Defense." Excerpted from "Voluntary Active Euthanasia," Hastings Center Report 22 (March/April) 1992: pp. 165. Rachels, James. "Active and Passive Euthanasia," The New England Journal of Medicine, 292, No. 2 (January 9, 1975), pp. 78-79. |