• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Thoughtcrime

pure_mercury

Order Now!
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
6,946
MBTI Type
ESFJ
All ideas should be respected, no matter how stupid they are, as long as the person genuinely takes it seriously. The human mind is a network of intricate connections, the next plausible idea thought up could get fame and controversy. Animal/human hybrids, for example. I don't see why it's so wrong.

I disagree here. I have absolutely no responsibility to respect someone else's opinions and ideas if I find them idiotic, baseless, evil, etc. I just can't restrict his or her right to express them.
 

pure_mercury

Order Now!
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
6,946
MBTI Type
ESFJ
I couldn't agree more.

"Guns don't kill people, video games kill people" :doh:

People shouldn't blame guns or video games or Marilyn Manson for their own actions (or the actions of their fucked-up, spoiled, violent offspring).
 

suzyk

New member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
95
MBTI Type
INTP
I disagree here. I have absolutely no responsibility to respect someone else's opinions and ideas if I find them idiotic, baseless, evil, etc. I just can't restrict his or her right to express them.

Maybe you just can't see from their perspective. Granted, I also can't stand some stupid ideas, but after I put some thought into it, I see how that person reacher their conclusion.
 

Carebear

will make your day
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
1,449
MBTI Type
INFP
People shouldn't blame guns or video games or Marilyn Manson for their own actions (or the actions of their fucked-up, spoiled, violent offspring).

I agree with you, though I probably disagree with your view on gun control (unless you're also of the opinion that the fewer guns a society has availiable, the better.) That's another discussion, though. People have a responsibility for their own actions, and blaming guns, music, video games and so on is just stupid.
 

pure_mercury

Order Now!
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
6,946
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Maybe you just can't see from their perspective. Granted, I also can't stand some stupid ideas, but after I put some thought into it, I see how that person reacher their conclusion.

I often see how they came to their conclusion, but that doesn't necessarily make the conclusion any more acceptable. Marxism-Leninism has logic to it; that doesn't mean I have to feel any affinity for its methods or aims.
 

suzyk

New member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
95
MBTI Type
INTP
Well, that's your view on it. People always bug you about 'freedom of speech/thoughts/ideas/etc.', but in the end, there are more people opposing ideas than claiming that it's their right to think up and suggest their idea to the world. I don't feel hatred very strongly for any ideas.
 

pure_mercury

Order Now!
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
6,946
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Well, that's your view on it. People always bug you about 'freedom of speech/thoughts/ideas/etc.', but in the end, there are more people opposing ideas than claiming that it's their right to think up and suggest their idea to the world. I don't feel hatred very strongly for any ideas.

I think that the sticking point is that freedom of speech and ideas also means the freedom to mock someone else's viewpoints. You are "free" to do as you like, but that doesn't mean anyone else has to support you.
 

suzyk

New member
Joined
Apr 7, 2008
Messages
95
MBTI Type
INTP
You phrased it correctly. So too much freedom can equal too much criticism, so you are also right. But since we do have freedom of speech here, I'll respect your views on ideas and mine to myself. The problem is respect, and how some things are said that affects people.
 

ThatsWhatHeSaid

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
7,263
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
The problem with speech that incites violence is that the thwarts the process of examination altogether.
 

Kiddo

Furry Critter with Claws
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
2,790
MBTI Type
OMNi
Are some ideas too dangerous to be seriously considered and given credence?

You can share an idea. That doesn't mean people have to listen.

Are gut level reactions of abhorrence or distaste to certain ideas hardwired or trappings of societal prohibitions?

Most are societal. Disgust and abhorrence are an emotional reaction to something we have learned to find unpleasant.

Just in case, I don't mean people can't literally think these thoughts, I mean should they be given a public platform say on Good Morning America (or whatever the equivalent is in your country).

Nancy Grace, a former attorney who showed absolutely no ethics, got a show and she sensationalizes crimes that are already horrific. Of course, I don't blame her or her network, only the people who watch that crap.
 

ygolo

My termites win
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
5,986
Here is what I believe:

Yes. Some ideas are dangerous. I for one think many of Nietzsche's ideas are dangerous. But some are interesting and important.

But trying to suppress the dangerous idea actually does the opposite. I see this as the social version of the "Don't think about <x>" phenomenon (where we are in-fact compelled to think about <x> while trying not to thikn about it).

The best thing to do with dangerous ideas is to simply treat them like every other and reject it like we do most ideas any way (since most ideas are not that great in the first place). Calling special attention to it makes things worse, because it treats it as something special, and gives it more attention and focus.

Once it blows up to that level, there is nothing we can do but try and contain the damage done by those notions, and show why they are unsound.

An other issue, is that many times people will twist an otherwise innocuous idea into something dangerous and rail against it. This again gives rise to a dangerous idea and gives it more life.

A lot of other times, an ideas is dangerous to some for the very reason that they are good for people in general. The right for women to vote is one of those ideas. It threatened a lot of men, but has been better for us overall. The fact was that the prodjudice against women voters was holding society back, but it still yeilded many benifits to those in power. It was a dangerous idea to them.

That is why I believe that ideas should simply be let to run their course on their own merits. If we label ideas as "dangerous" we start distorting the dynamics and give it more power. Perhaps that is just part of the game. But I don't think it has the effect that people who do the labeling want it to have.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Messages
7,312
MBTI Type
INTJ
The line between thought and an action is a muddy one, even in the law. Otherwise conspiracy, attempted murder or threatening to kill the president would not be crimes.

As far as freedom of speech goes, I think too often it is assumed that freedom of speech includes an obligation by others to provide an outlet for that speech and for all of us to listen. All it means is that you can't be made to shut up. No one is required to respect, listen to or broadcast your ideas.
 

heart

heart on fire
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
8,456
I disagree here. I have absolutely no responsibility to respect someone else's opinions and ideas if I find them idiotic, baseless, evil, etc. I just can't restrict his or her right to express them.


Yes, I agree with this.
 

Nadir

Enigma
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
544
MBTI Type
INxJ
Enneagram
4
If you try to strangle "dangerous" ideas, they'll most likely find a way to spitefully hang on to life in return. And like a virus needing host cells to spread and mutate further, thoughts need humans and the range of human expression to manifest. So, in this case -- you'd probably do better to blame the messenger.

Not that I advocate limiting thought -- I find myself agreeing with pure mercury's perspective in this case.
 
Top