No. Like I said many times: The only thing that an absolute free speech clause would accomplish is to give even more power to the powerful and to make the disenfranchized even more so.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 31st, 2020, 2:44 pm Were you thinking I was referencing and/or supporting laws to that effect?
Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
OK. You had alluded to the fact that your list of immoral and illegal had major overlap.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 30th, 2020, 4:24 pmI don't know if you didn't keep reading. I noted that I'd prohibit certain sorts of contractual fraud. That's not a speech issue, it's an issue of either not delivering what one legally agreed to deliver and/or delivering things that weren't wanted, where those things weren't disclosed, even though they were known.
Re "verbal abuse" and "emotional abuse," I'd not legally prohibit either, and I'd only have a moral problem with them in some contexts.
So if I tell someone I'll pay them to shoot my neighbor, he's guilty and I'm scott free. What if lie to someone and tell them this pistol shaped thing is a cigarette lighter so point it at my neighbor and pull the "trigger" to scare him, but it's in fact a real pistol. Am I guilt free and he shouldn't be guilty since he had no intent. So the episode is what? An accident? Is there even a crime?
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
You're committing contractual fraud which in that case led to an accidental homicide.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
Okay, but if I didn't say anything about supporting laws like you're talking about, why bring that up as if I did suggest that?baker wrote: ↑December 31st, 2020, 2:58 pmNo. Like I said many times: The only thing that an absolute free speech clause would accomplish is to give even more power to the powerful and to make the disenfranchized even more so.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 31st, 2020, 2:44 pm Were you thinking I was referencing and/or supporting laws to that effect?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
So lying is "contractual fraud". Thus in your world quite a bit of speech is in fact illegal. If it leads to an accidental homicide should it carry the penalty for murder or typical contractual fraud?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 31st, 2020, 6:28 pmYou're committing contractual fraud which in that case led to an accidental homicide.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
Why are we writing back and forth if you're not even bothering to read what I write? Above, in a post of mine that you responded to, I wrote: "Re what should be illegal in my view . . . contractual fraud (again only to certain degrees) . . . And 'to a certain degree' in all of those is because it's judgment-oriented rather than principle-oriented in my view, where in my view people have a tendency to take the principle-oriented approach and to overreact."LuckyR wrote: ↑December 31st, 2020, 7:15 pmSo lying is "contractual fraud". Thus in your world quite a bit of speech is in fact illegal. If it leads to an accidental homicide should it carry the penalty for murder or typical contractual fraud?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 31st, 2020, 6:28 pm
You're committing contractual fraud which in that case led to an accidental homicide.
I also wrote, in a post addressed to you, "contractual fraud . . . [is] not a speech issue, it's an issue of either not delivering what one legally agreed to deliver and/or delivering things that weren't wanted, where those things weren't disclosed, even though they were known."
So now I'd need to explain all of that AGAIN--as if I hadn't already typed it out, because you didn't bother to read or really pay attention to what I wrote just a day or two ago, in post addressed to you/that you actually responded to. If I explain it all again, why would we think that you're going to bother to read or really pay attention to it this time? What's supposed to be the attraction of that to me?
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
Not trying to exasperate, but I don't believe you commented (neither previously nor currently) on my actual question. That is: should contractual fraud that leads to accidental homicide be punished similarly to murder or typical fraud?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 31st, 2020, 8:01 pmWhy are we writing back and forth if you're not even bothering to read what I write? Above, in a post of mine that you responded to, I wrote: "Re what should be illegal in my view . . . contractual fraud (again only to certain degrees) . . . And 'to a certain degree' in all of those is because it's judgment-oriented rather than principle-oriented in my view, where in my view people have a tendency to take the principle-oriented approach and to overreact."
I also wrote, in a post addressed to you, "contractual fraud . . . [is] not a speech issue, it's an issue of either not delivering what one legally agreed to deliver and/or delivering things that weren't wanted, where those things weren't disclosed, even though they were known."
So now I'd need to explain all of that AGAIN--as if I hadn't already typed it out, because you didn't bother to read or really pay attention to what I wrote just a day or two ago, in post addressed to you/that you actually responded to. If I explain it all again, why would we think that you're going to bother to read or really pay attention to it this time? What's supposed to be the attraction of that to me?
As to my comment equating your idea of contractual fraud with "speech", you're right YOU mentioned it is "not a speech issue" and gave the example of deliverance of things. However, when you responded to my query on the accidental homicide there was ONLY lying (speech), no promise of goods or services.
I'm not ignoring your previous postings, I am following the logic train of your responses.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
The reason it's contractual fraud is this:LuckyR wrote: ↑January 1st, 2021, 2:12 amNot trying to exasperate, but I don't believe you commented (neither previously nor currently) on my actual question. That is: should contractual fraud that leads to accidental homicide be punished similarly to murder or typical fraud?Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 31st, 2020, 8:01 pm
Why are we writing back and forth if you're not even bothering to read what I write? Above, in a post of mine that you responded to, I wrote: "Re what should be illegal in my view . . . contractual fraud (again only to certain degrees) . . . And 'to a certain degree' in all of those is because it's judgment-oriented rather than principle-oriented in my view, where in my view people have a tendency to take the principle-oriented approach and to overreact."
I also wrote, in a post addressed to you, "contractual fraud . . . [is] not a speech issue, it's an issue of either not delivering what one legally agreed to deliver and/or delivering things that weren't wanted, where those things weren't disclosed, even though they were known."
So now I'd need to explain all of that AGAIN--as if I hadn't already typed it out, because you didn't bother to read or really pay attention to what I wrote just a day or two ago, in post addressed to you/that you actually responded to. If I explain it all again, why would we think that you're going to bother to read or really pay attention to it this time? What's supposed to be the attraction of that to me?
As to my comment equating your idea of contractual fraud with "speech", you're right YOU mentioned it is "not a speech issue" and gave the example of deliverance of things. However, when you responded to my query on the accidental homicide there was ONLY lying (speech), no promise of goods or services.
I'm not ignoring your previous postings, I am following the logic train of your responses.
You're promising to present your neighbor with a pistol-shaped lighter, and he's agreeing to scare someone else with it, on the belief that he's being delivered a pistol-shaped lighter. You know that it's really a pistol and not a lighter. So you're promising to deliver something that you have no intention of delivering. You're planning on substituting something else instead, something that your neighbor didn't contractually agree to.
That's what all contractual fraud amounts to--promising to present/deliver or do x, in exchange for someone else promising to present/deliver or do y, but at some point in the process of completing the transactions in question, either something is misrepresented (that is, to at least one party's knowledge, what's to be presented/delivered or done isn't what the party claimed it would be) or one decides at some point to simply not present/deliver or do what one promised. It's a species of consent "violation."
Re punishment, sure, I'd punish all contractual fraud that I'd consider significant enough to be illegal (which again would be a judgment call, not some sort of robotic principle), and contractual fraud that led to someone's death would receive a more severe punishment than many other examples of contractual fraud.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
I have no problem with something currently called manslaughter, labeled contractual fraud and punished like manslaughter.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑January 1st, 2021, 9:04 amThe reason it's contractual fraud is this:LuckyR wrote: ↑January 1st, 2021, 2:12 am
Not trying to exasperate, but I don't believe you commented (neither previously nor currently) on my actual question. That is: should contractual fraud that leads to accidental homicide be punished similarly to murder or typical fraud?
As to my comment equating your idea of contractual fraud with "speech", you're right YOU mentioned it is "not a speech issue" and gave the example of deliverance of things. However, when you responded to my query on the accidental homicide there was ONLY lying (speech), no promise of goods or services.
I'm not ignoring your previous postings, I am following the logic train of your responses.
You're promising to present your neighbor with a pistol-shaped lighter, and he's agreeing to scare someone else with it, on the belief that he's being delivered a pistol-shaped lighter. You know that it's really a pistol and not a lighter. So you're promising to deliver something that you have no intention of delivering. You're planning on substituting something else instead, something that your neighbor didn't contractually agree to.
That's what all contractual fraud amounts to--promising to present/deliver or do x, in exchange for someone else promising to present/deliver or do y, but at some point in the process of completing the transactions in question, either something is misrepresented (that is, to at least one party's knowledge, what's to be presented/delivered or done isn't what the party claimed it would be) or one decides at some point to simply not present/deliver or do what one promised. It's a species of consent "violation."
Re punishment, sure, I'd punish all contractual fraud that I'd consider significant enough to be illegal (which again would be a judgment call, not some sort of robotic principle), and contractual fraud that led to someone's death would receive a more severe punishment than many other examples of contractual fraud.
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
You take the tendency of people to suppress other people far too lightly.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 31st, 2020, 6:30 pmOkay, but if I didn't say anything about supporting laws like you're talking about, why bring that up as if I did suggest that?
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
The above is not an answer to the question of why you were talking as if I had been advocating or supporting tolerance laws.baker wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2021, 8:18 amYou take the tendency of people to suppress other people far too lightly.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑December 31st, 2020, 6:30 pm Okay, but if I didn't say anything about supporting laws like you're talking about, why bring that up as if I did suggest that?
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
By supporting absolute free speech, you support people's tendency to suppress others.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2021, 8:30 amThe above is not an answer to the question of why you were talking as if I had been advocating or supporting tolerance laws.
By making absolute free speech legal, you also legalize that people suppress others, legally, in accorsdance with their power.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
I don't consider any speech to be sufficient for suppression. Suppression requires more than speech. Sticks and stones, you know?baker wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2021, 8:50 amBy supporting absolute free speech, you support people's tendency to suppress others.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2021, 8:30 am The above is not an answer to the question of why you were talking as if I had been advocating or supporting tolerance laws.
By making absolute free speech legal, you also legalize that people suppress others, legally, in accorsdance with their power.
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
Sure.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2021, 8:56 amI don't consider any speech to be sufficient for suppression. Suppression requires more than speech. Sticks and stones, you know?
And when those with less power censor themselves, deny themselves free speech, avoid saying things that could trigger revenge from those with more power (revenge as in firing people, destroying their property, physically injuring them), you get the perfect image of what absolute free speech does and how it works.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Relationship between fictional CP and grooming?
lolbaker wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2021, 9:20 amSure.Terrapin Station wrote: ↑January 2nd, 2021, 8:56 amI don't consider any speech to be sufficient for suppression. Suppression requires more than speech. Sticks and stones, you know?
And when those with less power censor themselves, deny themselves free speech,
You can't "deny yourself free speech" period. Deciding to not say something isn't "denying yourself free speech."
However, if mere speech is causing other people to take actions that would deprive you of your livelihood, your freedom, body parts, etc., then other people are squelching your freedom of speech.
This doesn't imply that I'd have "tolerance legislation."
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023