He is responsible for what he says and does. Social consequences are a part of that. If there is no price for bad ideas, they never change.
I don't think we should normalise idea an employer gets to say what views employees can have in own time. The opposite.
-
-
Moral knowledge is an iterative process where we loop through problems over and over, increasing our resolution to see the best answers.
-
B/c of this, we need what you're saying (speech w/o conseq culture), but we also need room for mistakes and failures.
-
I don't know what you mean in this context. There will always be mistakes & failures.
-
I think format is difficult. I also think ignoring practical issues in an ethical convo abt work, speech and culture is impossible (for me).
-
I can see that. We should be able to though. Clear diff between principle & practical consequences.
-
Maybe try thought experiment. Imagine no practical consequences. Shld he be fired on purely ethical punitive grounds?
-
No, unless explicity noted in company policy.
-
Gah, even in the thought experiment I can't stop myself. Haha. My answer is just 'no.' :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.