3 ms·

Motive is a relevant consideration in legal cases, in addition to speech and action. So no, we do in fact literally judge people in their internal thoughts.

• godelski 8y ago
  But as you are pointing out, they took action on that thought. It was more than just fleeting.
  • sangnoir 8y ago
    > But as you are pointing out, they took action on that thought They didn't take action if I correctly understood the allegory. If an organisation is a person (my friend...), then individual workers are like neurons/brain regions. This internal video is analogous to a thought that may or may not be acted out by creating a product that impacts other people outside of the org. I agree that the idea is dystopian, but the article was a little over the top with the scaremongering.
    • godelski 8y ago
      Making a video is action. It is not implementation, but it is definitely action.
      • falcor84 8y ago
        Of course we're just arguing about semantics here, but I would absolutely argue that under the organisation-as-person metaphor, this video is absolutely not an "action" by the organism, but rather just part of its internal process. I'd say it's similar to how leading a military exercise does not actually constitute military action, unless you end up actually invading some place.
  • wffurr 8y ago
    The action alone is not what is judged. It is action and intent.