@BrianMcleish But it's not dangerous *itself*. It's consequences can be dangerous, but that's not the claim...
-
-
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@PhilosophyExp fire can heat or burn but we say fire is dangerous. It is its potential that makes it so.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrianMcleish
@BrianMcleish Except actually we wouldn't say "fire *itself* is dangerous". That would be a very odd construction (because it isn't).2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@PhilosophyExp ..and the word dangerous implies potential harm. Once the harm is caused we would call something harmful.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrianMcleish
@BrianMcleish Hang on - I'm aware fire is dangerous! I'm disputing that it makes sense to say, "Fire itself is dangerous".1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@PhilosophyExp why does it not make sense to say that fire itself is dangerous? The potential for harm is the deciding factor.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BrianMcleish
@BrianMcleish And remember, Arendt is explicitly disavowing particular thoughts being dangerous.4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@PhilosophyExp@BrianMcleish Also remember that "thinking" and "willing" are related for Arendt in a particular way.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @drjenpierce
@drjenpierce@BrianMcleish Yes, but the point I'm making is that it's a silly *quote*. It's quoted without context, etc,1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @PhilosophyExp
@PhilosophyExp@BrianMcleish Even so--if you know Socrates:the moral of the story is the individual who thinks is a danger to the state.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@drjenpierce It's the same with Russell's - "people would rather die than think" quote. It's self-aggrandisement masquerading as profundity.
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.