4 ms·

Let's say that magic is real, OK? Magic actually works. Science hasn't noticed it yet because psychologists don't get network effects and don't have the data se

Let's say that magic is real, OK? Magic actually works. Science hasn't noticed it yet because psychologists don't get network effects and don't have the data sets. But let's say this is the case. That means words have power. Certain words and phrases, repeated in the right way, perceived in the right way, will get people real sick. Names and labels have even more power. The right name can change people, give them a new identity. They change the way people see themselves, how they behave. Some websites, some communities, are chronic incubators of the bad kind of magic. Enough exposure to it and you'll start having bad thoughts, you'll get depressed, withdraw from society, maybe start giving a harmful kind of name to yourself, maybe hurt yourself or other people. Sure, the boundary between mental illness and not-a-mental illness is vague, and maybe subject to abuse (just ask the Russians). But some stuff is unquestionably both contagious and harmful. We just have to be careful not to get exposed to bad juju out there. We don't have to sterilize every water source on the planet. Some people like drinking out of rivers. But we'd be crazy not to treat our water for obvious bugs. But it does mean we should be prudent about what we're consuming, and what our families are taking in. And if you were a government, you'd be tempted to do some harm-benefit analysis. You could say that free speech isn't an absolute, and promoting, say, bulimia or terrorism carries great harm and should be minimized, as many governments do.

xg15 10y ago
Well, good thing then that magic probably isn't real - and that we actually do have a lot of knowledge about the real effects of words and ideas on people. But anyway, the usual counter-arguments to censorship "for your own safety" apply, whether you name it censorship or "sterilization" or anything else. For example, what would be the "obvious bugs" in that case? As I agree that certain communities can be harmful to certain groups of people and I would agree to blocking - because there is an established body of psychological literature that can tell you why and how those things are doing harm. And even in those cases it's not always clear-cut. (Such sites are already being blocked in a number of countries btw, for example germany.) But the parent poster was talking about Tumblr and 4chan. They think those sites are "contagious", I think they are not. So who would decide? And what about other cultures? If you ask an iranian or chinese official, they would tell you that the western media are highly contagious and harmful. Shouldn't we block those as well then? Or whatabout showing Saw in our cinemas? Is that good for the mental health? So far the western strategy in those matters was to give freedom priority and instead strengthen the immune system of the individuals (to keep using that metaphor). And I don't see a good reason to change that.

xg15 10y ago

Well, good thing then that magic probably isn't real - and that we actually do have a lot of knowledge about the real effects of words and ideas on people. But anyway, the usual counter-arguments to censorship "for your own safety" apply, whether you name it censorship or "sterilization" or anything else. For example, what would be the "obvious bugs" in that case? As I agree that certain communities can be harmful to certain groups of people and I would agree to blocking - because there is an established body of psychological literature that can tell you why and how those things are doing harm. And even in those cases it's not always clear-cut. (Such sites are already being blocked in a number of countries btw, for example germany.) But the parent poster was talking about Tumblr and 4chan. They think those sites are "contagious", I think they are not. So who would decide? And what about other cultures? If you ask an iranian or chinese official, they would tell you that the western media are highly contagious and harmful. Shouldn't we block those as well then? Or whatabout showing Saw in our cinemas? Is that good for the mental health? So far the western strategy in those matters was to give freedom priority and instead strengthen the immune system of the individuals (to keep using that metaphor). And I don't see a good reason to change that.