ABSTRACT
As Tanesini observes, silence is increasingly used as a means to protest and resist. Silence can be, and is used as, a communicative act. This, however, has gone unnoticed by philosophical accounts of dissent. Tanesini’s paper fills this lacuna in the philosophical literature by showing how silence can be an illocution. In so doing she offers an analysis of what she calls “eloquent silence.” These silences are, and are intended to be communicative and can indicate resistance and dissent. This means that silence, contrary to some accounts, does not always indicate acceptance. Tanesini also identifies some features of eloquent silences that explain why they are effective means of expressing dissent.
