Too many people think of FoS in terms of laws and too many see exceptions to it on the level of ideas rather than contexts. If you say you support freedom of speech but not for certain ideas because they cross a line, you are mistaken. You do not support freedom of speech.
-
-
Show this thread
-
Own this. You have an ethical rationale. Usually it is that you value the free exchange of almost all ideas but your concern for the psychological wellbeing of vulnerable groups or the potential for inspiring violence takes priority over supporting the free exchange of all.
Show this thread -
This is a coherent, well-motivated argument. I disagree with it on the grounds that it sets a bad precedent which could well backfire on those vulnerable groups & that protecting people from ideas is not really helping them & that dangerous ideas need refuting in broad daylight.
Show this thread -
But we can talk about this and maybe change each other's minds if we agree on what we are talking about and don't get bogged down in everybody insisting that they do support freedom of speech whilst talking about different things.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It does get confusing, since most over 40, would see this as the expected norm anywhere outside the workplace, and for many within the workplace. Hence the rise of the Intellectual Dark Web.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It’s worth adding that MAGA’s & Petersonian lobsters will brandish “free speech” in response to “I’m pretty sure you’re wrong about this.” I was once accused of “unpersoning” Dave Rubin (1984 style) for saying it was a bad idea to go on Jones’ show.
-
A failed discussion of the free speech principle ensued
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.