5 ms·

Doesn't free speech also enable lies and immoral ideals to be spread by bots/people too? It seems it's a double edged sword in a way but I don't think censorshi

Doesn't free speech also enable lies and immoral ideals to be spread by bots/people too? It seems it's a double edged sword in a way but I don't think censorship is a solution. I don't think there is a solution beyond education?

ailideex 7y ago
> Doesn't free speech also enable lies and immoral ideals to be spread by bots/people too? Yes. I don't think the government should be our moral police nor should it dictate what morals are acceptable. > I don't think there is a solution beyond education? I don't think education should try and instil morals. This seems rather totalitarian to me. Where would these morals come from, how would we decide what morals our children should be indoctrinated with in school?
- Catsandkites 7y ago
  So where should morals come from? If not from governance or education? (Honest question).
  - ailideex 7y ago
    Parents, family, friends, community - many places - being dictated morality in school from a government seems rather perverse though. I'm sure it sounds great if you also think that nobody with morals that is not yours should ever have political power - but that is not an option and even if it was I don't think that is a reasonable expectation or desire.
    - morsch 7y ago
      School is the community kids spend half their waking lives in. Of course they will learn about morals there. Teachers are a big part of it, as is the curriculum. Both are to some degree checked by the democratic process. None of this is new or totalitarian or particularly controversial in practice, since most of morality is not particularly controversial in the first place (in a given community at a specific time). People with divergent morality from the society they live in avoid public schools, one way or another.
      - ailideex 7y ago
        The curriculum is not part of the community - and either the curriculum dictates morals or it does not. If it does I have a problem with it, if it does not I don't. I doubt the person I was responding with was referencing anything but the curriculum when they said "I don't think there is a solution beyond education?". And to be clear this is also what I was referencing if that was not clear enough. If it was just some teacher's own opinion and there was no insistence that the children must adopt it then I would not characterise it as dictating morality in school. And in my view dictating morality as part of the curriculum is totalitarian and perverse.
        abdullahkhalids 7y ago
        You will be surprised how difficult it is to teach a lot of subjects without taking moral positions or at least discussing them. In a literature course, students are going to read fiction in which the authors will have taken moral positions. If you don't discuss the morality in class, students are likely to be strongly influenced by that morality - good or bad. If you do discuss the morality, they will be impacted by the morality of the teacher and their peers. A course on biology can teach genetic editing. If you don't discuss morals and ethics in that course around the issue of designer babies, you will have raised young people who might think the tech is cool without understanding its dangers. Your only solution is to talk about the morality of it. And obviously, courses on economics or political science can't even begin to be taught without assuming certain moral or philosophical positions. Education is complicated. It is teaching people how to understand the world around them, and morality is part and parcel of that world.
        ailideex 7y ago
        > If you don't discuss the morality in class, students are likely to be strongly influenced by that morality - good or bad. Discussing morality in school is not the same as dictating morality in school. If the governments position is these are the morals that the school system must instill in children then I have a problem with it - if not - great - have at it. > And obviously, courses on economics or political science can't even begin to be taught without assuming certain moral or philosophical positions. I don't see how any course in economics or political science requires the pupils to adopt any specific morals.
Tempest1981 7y ago
Education works for fact-based debates. And logical thinkers. But today, there is a lot of emotional manipulation. In the US, recently, xenophobia fears are incited and played upon. Moderate bullying tactics are employed, being careful to avoid hate-speech. Not sure education plays a role when primal fear is involved.
- ailideex 7y ago
  How do you get from facts to morals though?
tenebrisalietum 7y ago
Mostly a thought-experiment here: There's a class of people+situations where there's a communication asymmetry. For example, someone in a position of authority can create a press conference and deliver communication to hundreds or thousands, and people can't contest and deliver communication back to all listeners in an equally timely manner. So these situations are one-sided and prone to be abused as propaganda delivery mechanisms. Why can't we require speech in these specific situations to follow a couple rules: - Statements of opinions must be preceded by a notice that X is your opinion, for each statement. - Stating things that are provably incorrect is a violation of law. - Statements that encourage behavior that is against the law is a violation of law.

ailideex 7y ago

> Doesn't free speech also enable lies and immoral ideals to be spread by bots/people too? Yes. I don't think the government should be our moral police nor should it dictate what morals are acceptable. > I don't think there is a solution beyond education? I don't think education should try and instil morals. This seems rather totalitarian to me. Where would these morals come from, how would we decide what morals our children should be indoctrinated with in school?

Catsandkites 7y ago
So where should morals come from? If not from governance or education? (Honest question).
- ailideex 7y ago
  Parents, family, friends, community - many places - being dictated morality in school from a government seems rather perverse though. I'm sure it sounds great if you also think that nobody with morals that is not yours should ever have political power - but that is not an option and even if it was I don't think that is a reasonable expectation or desire.
  - morsch 7y ago
    School is the community kids spend half their waking lives in. Of course they will learn about morals there. Teachers are a big part of it, as is the curriculum. Both are to some degree checked by the democratic process. None of this is new or totalitarian or particularly controversial in practice, since most of morality is not particularly controversial in the first place (in a given community at a specific time). People with divergent morality from the society they live in avoid public schools, one way or another.
    - ailideex 7y ago
      The curriculum is not part of the community - and either the curriculum dictates morals or it does not. If it does I have a problem with it, if it does not I don't. I doubt the person I was responding with was referencing anything but the curriculum when they said "I don't think there is a solution beyond education?". And to be clear this is also what I was referencing if that was not clear enough. If it was just some teacher's own opinion and there was no insistence that the children must adopt it then I would not characterise it as dictating morality in school. And in my view dictating morality as part of the curriculum is totalitarian and perverse.
      - abdullahkhalids 7y ago
        You will be surprised how difficult it is to teach a lot of subjects without taking moral positions or at least discussing them. In a literature course, students are going to read fiction in which the authors will have taken moral positions. If you don't discuss the morality in class, students are likely to be strongly influenced by that morality - good or bad. If you do discuss the morality, they will be impacted by the morality of the teacher and their peers. A course on biology can teach genetic editing. If you don't discuss morals and ethics in that course around the issue of designer babies, you will have raised young people who might think the tech is cool without understanding its dangers. Your only solution is to talk about the morality of it. And obviously, courses on economics or political science can't even begin to be taught without assuming certain moral or philosophical positions. Education is complicated. It is teaching people how to understand the world around them, and morality is part and parcel of that world.
        ailideex 7y ago
        > If you don't discuss the morality in class, students are likely to be strongly influenced by that morality - good or bad. Discussing morality in school is not the same as dictating morality in school. If the governments position is these are the morals that the school system must instill in children then I have a problem with it - if not - great - have at it. > And obviously, courses on economics or political science can't even begin to be taught without assuming certain moral or philosophical positions. I don't see how any course in economics or political science requires the pupils to adopt any specific morals.

Tempest1981 7y ago

Education works for fact-based debates. And logical thinkers. But today, there is a lot of emotional manipulation. In the US, recently, xenophobia fears are incited and played upon. Moderate bullying tactics are employed, being careful to avoid hate-speech. Not sure education plays a role when primal fear is involved.

ailideex 7y ago
How do you get from facts to morals though?

tenebrisalietum 7y ago

Mostly a thought-experiment here: There's a class of people+situations where there's a communication asymmetry. For example, someone in a position of authority can create a press conference and deliver communication to hundreds or thousands, and people can't contest and deliver communication back to all listeners in an equally timely manner. So these situations are one-sided and prone to be abused as propaganda delivery mechanisms. Why can't we require speech in these specific situations to follow a couple rules: - Statements of opinions must be preceded by a notice that X is your opinion, for each statement. - Stating things that are provably incorrect is a violation of law. - Statements that encourage behavior that is against the law is a violation of law.