Is porn actually harmless, or are we just pretending?

[Carl-Richard]

On 30.3.2026 at 10:44 PM, Basman said:

 Prove it then.

Prove what? That triggering a neuronal response tends to lead to desensitization especially if it's a hedonic stimulus and not a noxious stimulus?

Here is a thing about studies: they don't actually "prove" anything. They provide evidence for or against. They update your priors. Finding a specific theoretical rationale based on more general connections between basic (strongly scientifically supported) concepts does essentially the same thing. It's all probabilistic at the end of the day. A specific study, or two, or three, is just one step further in the process.

If your only approach to epistemology is to read the conclusion of one or two studies from Dickwad University with a crappy self-report-based correlative design and paper-thin sample sizes and barely <.05 p-values and mixed results between 10 comparative measures, that's your prerogative.

Edited March 31 by Carl-Richard

[Infinity16]

On 3/29/2026 at 11:31 PM, Carl-Richard said:

We're not talking about the law here, you're lost in a different discussion. We're talking about whether porn is harmful or not. Why are you concerned about the "burden of proof" in this context?

Because if there is strong evidence that porn is harmful, that will presumably lead to more government regulation. This is what happened with tobacco.

[Carl-Richard]

On 1.4.2026 at 2:24 AM, Infinity16 said:

Because if there is strong evidence that porn is harmful, that will presumably lead to more government regulation. This is what happened with tobacco.

I have no idea what government regulation has to do with burden of proof, but ok.

This is what you said initially:

On 28.3.2026 at 5:03 PM, Infinity16 said:

All I can say on this topic is that the people saying that porn is harmful are making the claim. The burden of proof is on them.

 What if I say porn is not harmful, is the burden of proof on me?

[Lyubov]

Yeah it’s not great for society but also a lot of guys with mental health challenges and forming relationships magnify it as an issue 

Also the whole ecosystem broadly connects to a lot of disturbing abuse and corruption, sometimes abuse including minors. 

So there are some broad and serious problems when it comes to porn overall on the internet but also guys without girlfriends will go after other aspects of it to blame their incel issues on. 

[Basman]

"porn addiction", IE. afraid of job application and gets no bitches.

Idle hands. Stop coping.

[Infinity16]

On 4/22/2026 at 10:55 PM, Carl-Richard said:

I have no idea what government regulation has to do with burden of proof, but ok.

This is what you said initially:

 What if I say porn is not harmful, is the burden of proof on me?

Nope, because that is a negative claim. To understand why burden of proof is on a positive claim and not a negative one, Betrand Russell suggested that there was a teapot too small for telescopes to see, orbiting between Earth and Mars. Because the teapot is too small to be spotted by telescopes, the teapot's existence is unfalsifiable.

[LordFall]

Porn definitely saps my energy big time and makes simple tasks for my business and brand feel dreadful. I've been working on a nofap challenge, I failed and then journaled on my mood and motivation and there was a huge difference. 

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Infinity16 said:

Nope, because that is a negative claim.

Let's say porn not being harmful means porn is consistent with people being well-functioning and healthy. Is "porn is consistent with being well-functioning and healthy" a positive or a negative claim?