I don't mind being used. May use this thread to show my students actually. I might ask a few things, and may need to read more of what you have said. [1]Should Mill's Harm Principle be evoked? If so, to what end? [2] Why would the cliff example be forbade,and "fire!" not?
-
-
-
1) Yes. On the premise that hurt feelings do not constitute harm which is currently under threat. Difficult ideas are essential to grapple with. 2) I meant that both should be because I assume the 'fire' thing refers to causing a stampede which would be likely to cause injury
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think it is good to cover provocateurs. I am thinking more so people who deplatform,or interrupt. Is it forbade because it diminishes the -capacity- for free speech to occur? For me, I want an increase in chance opportunities of free speech, not just the principle
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Christopher Hitchens would agree with you. And he would say that if people are too stupid to see there's no fire when someone yells it...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.