When we're talking causality, there's only one option. — Terrapin Station
Why would I use the noun “consequence” instead of the verb “contribute”? No I do not understand. — NOS4A2
Your eyes are not your brain, they are connected, but they aren't the same thing. — Necrofantasia
What if the speech sparks violence, and consequently violence sparks genocide, and consequently genocide sparks the annihilation of the human race?Even if 'hate speech' (whatever that may be, really..) would cause an increase in violence, freedom of speech should be universal and never be impeded upon. — Tzeentch
It's not romantic spurning to be prohibited, but the advocation of violence as a fair mean to settle an issue.
The problem is not with the speech or the spurning, but the violence they advocate. — Shamshir
Advocation of violence is itself violence. — Shamshir
That's its purpose, dear. First the spark, then the inferno. — Shamshir
Anything that causes violence is an advocate of violence. — Shamshir
How much of free speech is being sacrificed with the removal of violent speech, as opposed to its preservation? Would you weigh the attrition of each for me?Moreover, before we start sacrificing something as fundamental as free speech, shouldn't we first aim to educate people? There is something profoundly pitiful about an adult who is hurt by a stranger's words. — Tzeentch
How much of free speech is being sacrificed with the removal of violent speech, as opposed to its preservation? Would you weigh the attrition of each for me? — Shamshir
As for aiming to educate folk, that is indeed a step forward - but what would you educate them in?
Perhaps merely empowering the intellect would add to the tension? — Shamshir
And may I ask, also, what and why is it pitiful that an adult may be hurt by a stranger's words?
How different do you see it as opposed to an adult being spat in their face by a stranger? — Shamshir
TV commercials do not cause every viewer to immediately go and and purchase the advertised product. Nevertheless they are effective at inducing some demand for the product.I disagree. Our world views are largely a consequence of our environment, and speech constitutes a large part of that environment.
Then how come my speech isn’t contributing to your world view? It seems to have the opposite effect. — NOS4A2
But advocation of violence and rallies to violence are not ambiguous in their intent, are they?The problem is, as is being demonstrated by contemporary politics, "violence" can be interpreted in many ways. Such ambiguity should never be brought into contact with fundamental human rights, because it will inevitably be used to undermine them. — Tzeentch
True intellect is not free from violence, if true intellect constitutes merely knowing things.True intellect never degenerates into violence.
A statement can be true, in which case an intellectual should be the first to accept it as such.
It can be false, in which case the intellectual may try to show the person the error of his ways. If he fails, he may pity the fool for his ignorance.
If it is an opinion it is no better or worse than blind faith, and an intellectual should put little value in it to begin with. — Tzeentch
Perhaps it is one's own insecure ego that hurts, like an open wound being smothered with salt - in this case, words.Nothing happens when someone insults you. It's one's own insecure ego that hurts, not another's words. After all, if the man has a point one should be grateful for the information. If it is false, one should carry on with their business and pay no mind. If it is opinion, well what is opinion but blind faith? — Tzeentch
But advocation of violence and rallies to violence are not ambiguous in their intent, are they? — Shamshir
So with safety being an inherent right of all living things, that they try so desperately to preserve, is it to be traded for the luxury of abrasive contention that is more aligned with as you put it - the 'insecure ego', rather than freedom from contention altogether? — Shamshir
I find the idea of abrasive speech constituting freedom of speech, quite misaligned, as it actually inhibits freedom of speech — Shamshir
Though it be true that harming a person will bring them pain, there is nothing in the intellect that prohibits this. No, this is merely an observation. — Shamshir
Perhaps it is one's own insecure ego that hurts, like an open wound being smothered with salt - in this case, words.
If that wound was not there in the first place, the salt would not hurt. Yet is it fair to rub the salt in? Should it be done, just because it may be done?
What about bandaging it up? Perhaps there are other words that could be used to that effect?
In which case, why use the hurtful ones, over the mending ones?
Though what may be said, may be true - a violent demonstration will only feed feed the insecure ego.
Neither party will gain from this, both will lessen. — Shamshir
Why couldn't you do a "what if" in the same vein about any arbitrary thing?
"What if anger about being spurned romantically sparks violence, and that violence sparks revenge, and that revenge sparks genocide?" etc. — Terrapin Station
TV commercials do not cause every viewer to immediately go and and purchase the advertised product. Nevertheless they are effective at inducing some demand for the product. — Relativist
It would be practically impossible to ban anger, so that's not even worth bringing up as an attempt at producing a counterexample. — S
You gotta read more dystopias. I think anger and emotions in general are being slowly banned. It'll take a while though, psychotropics are only so effective. But look how far they've come in diagnosing pretty much any so called negative emotion as part of a syndrome or other pathology.It would be practically impossible to ban anger, so that's not even worth bringing up as an attempt at producing a counterexample. — S
?? "Being spurned romantically" refers to someone turning you down when you're romantically interested in them. — Terrapin Station
Okay, just swap "being angry" with "being spurned romantically". It's not like that makes it any less impractical, impossible, and ridiculous. — S
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.