Jeremy Stangroom

@BrianMcleish Except actually we wouldn't say "fire *itself* is dangerous". That would be a very odd construction (because it isn't).

@PhilosophyExp ..and the word dangerous implies potential harm. Once the harm is caused we would call something harmful.

@BrianMcleish Hang on - I'm aware fire is dangerous! I'm disputing that it makes sense to say, "Fire itself is dangerous".

@PhilosophyExp why does it not make sense to say that fire itself is dangerous? The potential for harm is the deciding factor.

@BrianMcleish And remember, Arendt is explicitly disavowing particular thoughts being dangerous.

@PhilosophyExp @BrianMcleish Also remember that "thinking" and "willing" are related for Arendt in a particular way.

@drjenpierce @BrianMcleish Yes, but the point I'm making is that it's a silly *quote*. It's quoted without context, etc,

@PhilosophyExp @BrianMcleish Even so--if you know Socrates:the moral of the story is the individual who thinks is a danger to the state.