Isaac

OK. At least your clarity has saved me from wasting any more time. You're clearly either a sociopath or (more likely I suspect) simply pretending to b...

Ah. So you disagree with all laws aimed at protecting people from harm. You would allow people to throw rocks at passersby, shoot guns at them presuma...

Maybe I could frame it in your terms then. I wish to throw rock off a building. You wish to walk down the street below but can't do so for fear of bei...

So you're saying that there is never a need to decide whether to allow one person's liberty when it might constrain another's?

If those two liberties clashed (ie you can't have one without removing the other) which would you remove and by what degree? It's not a complicated si...

Right. And finally (I will get to my point after this, though I suspect you know where I'm going, I just want to be clear though)...how would you rate...

OK, so granted your conditions pertain. Is there some natural force in existence that specifically prevents such a hypothetical from being the case? I...

Any intention of addressing the actual substance of my post, or just the quibble about the meaning of libertarianism (although claiming that libertari...

Right so what started out as "that's just what libertarianism is" is now about the exact degree of vagueness libertarianism as a whole philosophy ascr...

Yes. Almost certainly I will. That's the point I've been trying to make. I'm going to stick to my position unless you present me with overwhelming evi...

Are you suggesting standard libertarianism doesn't weight individual freedoms against the restriction of liberty of others?

Yes, I didn't get to mentioning the low sample size.

Individual liberty, even in libertarianism, is weighed against imposing restrictions on the liberty of others. So the importance of one liberty carrie...

Immediately that would fail the ethical standards. I can assure you of that because I have been partly responsible for writing them. We cannot risk in...

Why? Is this just a foundational feeling you have, or do you have some reason to think its bad. It seems like a really odd thing to decide is bad on t...

Exactly. Absolutely any claim I forward will have flaws in its methodology. The flaws are absolutely inherent in social sciences and cannot be elimina...

Says it all, I think.

Hear hear.

Yes, I'm aware of both. The query I was raising was a meta-philosophical one about the approach to discussion. If the sum total of a post's contributi...

But how does free speech achieve this if speech acts have no causal effects? How does free speech make people diagnose, improve and correct things, I ...

In addition to what S has already asked about the statement he quotes, I'd also like to know - useful to what ends? Use must have a purpose, nothing i...

Yes, but again you're merely describing, not reasoning. Why is measurement by the ability to propogate a bad thing? What use is the alternative? How a...

You do realise that the historical origins of an idea are not determinate either of its accuracy, nor its practicality? So often you make these claims...

No, I don't think intuition provides us with knowledge, for the reason you gave. Which is why I remain baffled by your question. How are you going to ...

Yes, but only definitional answers not normative ones. If you define morality as "maximising personal pleasure at the expense of others" that makes cl...

To those who argue both that hate speech is not causal to action, and that eroding free speech is bad for society, I'm wondering in what way is erosio...

I know that's what you were asking for. I'm interested in why. Are you really so naive as to think that social sciences are capable of delivering uneq...

This is what I wanted to avoid. Of course you don't see anything about correlation studies. There's an entire history of behavioural psychology which ...

Section 2 "causes of hate crimes" discusses external causes. The subsection on family and educational factors list research by Judith Harris on the ef...

But people can only blur lines if they were clear beforehand.

I know I'm going to regret this, and I shouldn't let you bait me, but here is the standard work on the causes of hate crime from the Human Right Commi...

As I said. I'm more than happy to write another 100 post from my own thoughts. I enjoy thinking of arguments and looking for flaws. I do not enjoy res...

I'm not going round the houses on this, you tried this with the psychological evidence and I'm relieved that I didn't waste time on it. You ask for ev...

Right. So what barrier then prevents that biology from causing action?

Yes. A consistent correlation without any alternative explanation and a plausible mechanism by which it could have causal influence. That is what most...

Perhaps more relevant to our discussion. The hearing and interpretation of hate speech is also electrical signals. What barrier is in place to prevent...

How? How does neurological activity (which is electrical signals) begin with the listener. What causes the electrical signal?

I'll ask you the same as I asked Terrapin then. By what mechanism does it start? A violent action requires some neurological activity. This activity i...

But it is unreasonable. At least slightly so. Its unreasonable to believe physicists when they say there appears to be randomness at a sub-atomic scal...

You'll have to unpack that a bit, if you want me to comment on it. I have no idea what you might mean by "ontologically random", but at a very basic l...

Hate speech correlates with violent action. There are only three possible scenarios I can think of. 1. The link is phsycally causal. There is a direct...

But we can show it to be causal to violent actions, just not to your satisfaction. And the reason the evidence we have is not sufficient for you is be...

So the sum total of your argument as to why we should not legislate against hate speech despite the clear correlation with violence is that hate speec...

It's not about buying free will or not. It's about what course of action we take in the self-evident situation that we cannot tell for certain if we d...

Not according to my understanding of the terms 'meaning' and 'wrong'

We can't say, without making un-agreed upon commitments, that such a situation can exist, hence we must proceed in the absence of such certainty. We h...

Yes, but we might not know the truth of that fact, hence "appears".

You repeatedly claiming that doesn't start to make it true. If the confluence of 100 factors is sufficient to cause an event, then each one of them ca...

No. If they had what appears to be a choice, then it only shows that the speech is one cause among others and if those others are not present no viole...

... And this is why I didn't bother wasting my time. Who said anything about "didn't have a choice in how they acted", who ever mentioned hat the caus...