LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 2,001
0 members and 2,001 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 04:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 08-22-2018, 12:38 PM   #2394
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,231
Re: icymi above

Quote:
No, no it doesn't involve the testing of hypotheses. It involve observation and explanation. There's no testing. It's not science.
Observe, reach conclusion, observe some more to test conclusion. It's a process of reaching hypotheses and testing them.

Quote:
Why am I dwelling on this? Because you keep invoking the idea of science to suggest that there is some way to be objective and precise about judgments that are ultimately highly subjective and imprecise. There is nothing scientific about deciding that a group that has been discriminated against is somehow responsible for its own victimization.
That's a merits discussion you've been emphasizing.

Quote:
Yeah, I actually haven't said that. Which is inconvenient for your schtick, I know. Please go back to the paragraph yesterday with the observation that black cops shoot black kids. Why don't you try thinking about what I'm saying instead of putting words in my mouth.
Sure you have. The inescapable conclusion of your thinking is that certain things should not be said. That certain assertions should be immune to skepticism, or at a minimum skepticism of them should be marginalized, and never given a platform.

Quote:
It's on the table because I asked you the question. Using your logic, aren't you now censoring me because you are stifling my discussion and inquiry. Now you're the authoritarian, right? (NOTE: I DON'T REALLY THINK THIS BUT AM ASKING IT TO EXPOSE THE STUPIDITY OF THE IDEA.)
No. I've just flagged you for trying to change the subject. Carry on (and you will...).

Quote:
You say you've conceding your ideas don't have "much" social value. Why do they have any?
They might not have any. I don't know. But I do know that deciding what should or shouldn't be said based on the social value assessments of you or me is a very fucked up notion. And one that stands free speech on its ear.

That sort of thinking is but a few steps divorced from those bizarre hate speech laws they have in Europe. Bad ideas die from exposure. Passively squelching them only causes them to fester.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:56 PM.