Corrected 2) Being a deliberate provocateur is covered under freedom of speech because it is about the expression of opinions. Whether sincere or insincere, intended to provoke outrage or raise a serious point, they should not be banned. There is no line for this.https://twitter.com/jacobcrawfordYU/status/998636276348698626 …
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
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 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Replying to @jacobcrawfordYU
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
12:41 PM - 21 May 2018
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like
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.