3 ms·

I wasn’t calling it absolute. I used the word fundamental. My meaning was that giving people this freedom means giving them the freedom to lie as well. I agree

I wasn’t calling it absolute. I used the word fundamental. My meaning was that giving people this freedom means giving them the freedom to lie as well. I agree that we can debate specific exceptions, which I feel SCOTUS precedence has explored in very nuanced ways. But that’s not where I was going. I was making the point that even if you think something is a ‘truth’, what you perceive as a ‘lie’ must be allowed since only through that debate can people find their way to the truth. A truth that is just unchallenged feels more like propaganda.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> giving people this freedom means giving them the freedom to lie as well. I agree that we can debate specific exceptions We can. But we don't and never have. Anyone arguing for the freedom to lie without consequence is off the deep end. There has never been a society that doesn't punish lying and fraud. (What constitutes a lie is a deeper question.) > even if you think something is a ‘truth’, what you perceive as a ‘lie’ must be allowed Why? Also, where? Ever? If I go and commit a bunch of fraud, I'd expect--at best--riotious laughter from anyone with more than two brain cells if I offered, as my defence, that I cannot be punished for defrauding everyone because I'm part of the truth-finding process. > truth that is just unchallenged feels more like propaganda Propaganda is regularly challenged. A truth that cannot be challenged is an article of faith. This entire debate reeks of arguments from faith on both sides.
- EnigmaFlare 2y ago
  Fraud isn't just lying, it also has to be for some sort of personal gain, typically financial. You're taking their money too. If you tell people that if they invest in your pyramid scheme they'll get rich but you have no actual pyramid scheme and don't take anyone's money, then it's not fraud and shouldn't be banned in my opinion. But it is a lie.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Fraud isn't just lying, it also has to be for some sort of personal gain One, not true. If a real estate agent sells you a house based on a bunch of lies and somehow forgets to charge a commission, they're still punished. Two, you're still drawing criteria per which speech is punished.
    - EnigmaFlare 2y ago
      Well OK but he still sold the house. If you're not doing anything, just talking, it's not fraud. People often offer to sell a bridge to somebody as a way of saying they're gullible. That's not fraud because they're not actually selling the bridge.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > he still sold the house. If you're not doing anything, just talking, it's not fraud Let's edit the premise. No sale occurs. The agent spins some yarn, but you catch on and report them to a regulator. Do you expect them to go unpunished simply because it was all talk? Should they?
        stale2002 2y ago
        > Do you expect them to go unpunished simply because it was all talk? Should they? If there was no house to be sold, and the agent wasn't even an agent, and they had no way of accepting that money, then of course they should not be punished. As an example, lets say it was a youtuber who did this, and they recorded the video as a funny prank to post on the internet. This would not be illegal and they would not be punished.
        EnigmaFlare 2y ago
        Real estate agents have stricter ethics requirements from their professional body than the general law for everyone else. They might be punished for doing that. I don't know if they should or not.
- a_victorp 2y ago
  I totally agree with you. Saying that lying is part of the truth finding process demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of how any science work.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> giving people this freedom means giving them the freedom to lie as well. I agree that we can debate specific exceptions We can. But we don't and never have. Anyone arguing for the freedom to lie without consequence is off the deep end. There has never been a society that doesn't punish lying and fraud. (What constitutes a lie is a deeper question.) > even if you think something is a ‘truth’, what you perceive as a ‘lie’ must be allowed Why? Also, where? Ever? If I go and commit a bunch of fraud, I'd expect--at best--riotious laughter from anyone with more than two brain cells if I offered, as my defence, that I cannot be punished for defrauding everyone because I'm part of the truth-finding process. > truth that is just unchallenged feels more like propaganda Propaganda is regularly challenged. A truth that cannot be challenged is an article of faith. This entire debate reeks of arguments from faith on both sides.

EnigmaFlare 2y ago
Fraud isn't just lying, it also has to be for some sort of personal gain, typically financial. You're taking their money too. If you tell people that if they invest in your pyramid scheme they'll get rich but you have no actual pyramid scheme and don't take anyone's money, then it's not fraud and shouldn't be banned in my opinion. But it is a lie.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > Fraud isn't just lying, it also has to be for some sort of personal gain One, not true. If a real estate agent sells you a house based on a bunch of lies and somehow forgets to charge a commission, they're still punished. Two, you're still drawing criteria per which speech is punished.
  - EnigmaFlare 2y ago
    Well OK but he still sold the house. If you're not doing anything, just talking, it's not fraud. People often offer to sell a bridge to somebody as a way of saying they're gullible. That's not fraud because they're not actually selling the bridge.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > he still sold the house. If you're not doing anything, just talking, it's not fraud Let's edit the premise. No sale occurs. The agent spins some yarn, but you catch on and report them to a regulator. Do you expect them to go unpunished simply because it was all talk? Should they?
      - stale2002 2y ago
        > Do you expect them to go unpunished simply because it was all talk? Should they? If there was no house to be sold, and the agent wasn't even an agent, and they had no way of accepting that money, then of course they should not be punished. As an example, lets say it was a youtuber who did this, and they recorded the video as a funny prank to post on the internet. This would not be illegal and they would not be punished.
      - EnigmaFlare 2y ago
        Real estate agents have stricter ethics requirements from their professional body than the general law for everyone else. They might be punished for doing that. I don't know if they should or not.
a_victorp 2y ago
I totally agree with you. Saying that lying is part of the truth finding process demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of how any science work.