You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
If this is true, what follows from it? Suppose, for example, I discover a very persuasive argument for hard determinism. It has the consequence that many people come to believe there is no free will. https://twitter.com/Paul_Cornell/status/1135878490425888769 …
Suppose also it turns out that some subset of these people, perhaps those already struggling because of lack of privilege, find this belief, true or not, very hard to handle, and suicide increases among this group.
Further suppose that as a result of the belief a kind of nihilism arises among a different subset of the people who have become convinced free will doesn't exist, which leads to an increase in violence.
Do these things mean that I shouldn't hold the belief that hard determinism is true, and that I should not make the argument that it is?
Well, it's not in the least bit clear that it means either of these things.
If you're an act utilitarian you could plausibly argue that I ought to keep any such belief to myself.
But it seems to me that any other meta ethical position allows me to make the argument. Certainly if we think the pursuit of truth is a virtue then I should speak up.
Beliefs might have bad outcomes. Obviously that will always be a factor in any kind of moral calculus concerning when and where and how I should articulate the belief. (Normally don't tell a dying Christian there's no God).
But it doesn't necessarily or straightforwardly follow that bad outcomes mean that beliefs should not be held or articulated. This is true even if the geniuses on Twitter think otherwise.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
