Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-06T16:04:41.909Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Perlocutionary Silencing: A Linguistic Harm That Prevents Discursive Influence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2023

David C. Spewak Jr. Open the ORCID record for David C. Spewak Jr. [Opens in a new window]
David C. Spewak Jr.*
Affiliation:
Department of Humanities, Marion Military Institute, 1101 Washington St, Marion, AL 36756
*
Corresponding author. email d.spewak@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Various philosophers discuss perlocutionary silencing, but none defend an account of perlocutionary silencing. This gap may exist because perlocutionary success depends on extralinguistic effects, whereas silencing interrupts speech, leaving theorists to rely on extemporary accounts when they discuss perlocutionary silencing. Consequently, scholars assume perlocutionary silencing occurs but neglect to explain how perlocutionary silencing harms speakers as speakers. In relation to that shortcoming, I defend a novel account of perlocutionary silencing. I argue that speakers experience perlocutionary silencing when they are illegitimately deprived of perlocutionary influence on a conversation in which they are active participants, where perlocutionary influence on the conversation relates to speech-related perlocutionary goals meant to influence the conversation or conversational direction. Thus, this account grounds perlocutionary silencing in linguistic phenomena and characterizes perlocutionary silencing in a way that explains why those who experience perlocutionary silencing are harmed as speakers. Moreover, this account explains how perlocutionary silencing harms speakers as conversational participants in a way that cannot be captured by illocutionary or locutionary silencing, for a speaker may be perlocutionarily silenced despite illocutionary success. Consequently, the account explains why “All Lives Matter” silences Black Lives Matter and “Not All Men” silences women sharing experiences of sexual harassment.

Type
Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 38 , Issue 1 , Winter 2023 , pp. 86 - 104
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Hypatia, a Nonprofit Corporation

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Archard, David. 2007. The wrong of rape. Philosophical Quarterly 57 (228): 374–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9213.2007.492.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, J. L. 1962. How to do things with words, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Basu, Rima. 2019. The wrongs of racist beliefs. Philosophical Studies 176 (9): 2497–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basu, Rima, and Schroeder, Mark. 2019. Doxastic wronging. In Pragmatic encroachment in epistemology, ed. Kim, B. and McGrath, M.. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brandom, Robert B. 1994. Making it explicit: Reasoning, representing, and discursive commitment. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Chandler, D., and Munday, R.. 2016. Sealioning. A dictionary of social media. Oxford Reference. https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780191803093.001.0001/acref-9780191803093-e-1257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feinberg, Joel. 1984. Harm to others. Vol. 1 of The moral limits of the criminal law. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gardiner, Georgi. 2018. Evidentialism and moral encroachment. In Believing in accordance with the evidence, ed. McCain, Kevin. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
Hornsby, Jennifer. 1995. Disempowered speech. Philosophical Topics 23 (2): 127–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Amy. 2017. The multiple harms of sea lions. Harmful Speech Online, 13. https://dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/33746096/2017-08_harmfulspeech.pdf?sequence=5&isAllowed=y.Google Scholar
Kukla, Rebecca. 2014. Performative force, convention, and discursive injustice. Hypatia 29 (2): 440–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langton, Rae. 1993. Speech acts and unspeakable acts. Philosophy and Public Affairs 22 (4): 293–330.Google Scholar
Maitra, Ishani. 2004. Silence and responsibility. Philosophical Perspectives 18 (1): 189–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maitra, Ishani. 2009. Silencing speech. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 39 (2): 309–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGowan, Mary Kate. 2009. On silencing and sexual refusal. Journal of Political Philosophy 17 (4): 487–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGowan, Mary Kate. 2014. Sincerity silencing. Hypatia 29 (2): 458–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGowan, Mary Kate. 2017. On multiple types of silencing. In Beyond speech: Pornography and analytic feminist philosophy, ed. Mikkola, Mari. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Medina, Jose. 2012. Hermeneutical injustice and polyphonic contextualism: Social silences and shared hermeneutical responsibilities. Social Epistemology 26 (2): 201–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikkola, Mari. 2011. Illocution, silencing and the act of refusal. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (3): 415–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mikkola, Mari. 2016. The wrong of injustice: Dehumanization and its role in feminist philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jr, Pohlhaus., Gaile, . 2014. Discerning the primary epistemic harm in cases of testimonial injustice. Social Epistemology 28 (2): 99–114.Google Scholar
Roberts, Craige. 2015. Accommodation in a language game. In A companion to David Lewis, ed. Loewer, B. and Schaffer, J.. Malden, Mass.: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Jr, Spewak., David, . 2017. Understanding assertion to understand silencing: Finding an account of assertion that explains silencing arising from testimonial injustice. Episteme 14 (4): 423–40.Google Scholar
Tirrell, Lynne. 1999. Pornographic subordination: How pornography silences women. In Feminist ethics and politics, ed. F, Claudia. Card. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
Tumulty, Maura. 2012. Illocution and expectations of being heard. In Out from the shadows: Analytical feminist contributions to traditional philosophy, ed. Crasnow, Sharon L. and Superson, Anita M.. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar