3 ms·
The "or in deciding how we express ourselves" is what gets me in that passage. The social contract we had was described by Voltaire in Letters on England #6 ("a
by jkingsbery 6y ago
The "or in deciding how we express ourselves" is what gets me in that passage. The social contract we had was described by Voltaire in Letters on England #6 ("as there are such a multitude, they all live happy and in peace", https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2445/2445-h/2445-h.htm https://www.gutenberg.org/files/2445/2445-h/2445-h.htm). My religion should affect how I express myself; my religion should not affect how you express yourself (or vice versa).
- posterboy 6y agoNot directly (it can't anyway), but surely it does indirectly through your expression. That is, unless your religion leads to expressions that have no effect, or at least no effect about anyone's opinion on your religion. You are kind of denying that there is a meta game. The fastest way to loose is not to play and you are telling people not to play. Conversely however, the typical sectarian individualist would demand their religious feelings be respected. Answering the demand would of course affect validation. In this context I find your rule is a contradiction in terms. I'm already playing the meta game. The claim would be much stronger if your religion should not affect how you express yourself. Would be difficult to talk about it then, and so it would fulfil your demand, except that religion would likely not be your religion. But really, any good programm should terminate. Can we talk about hacking again?