Cherry picking these specific cards seems to be completely missing the point.
Yes and my point was cherry picking them for "Racism" is a brutal attack on common sense.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Cherry picking these specific cards seems to be completely missing the point.
Yes and my point was cherry picking them for "Racism" is a brutal attack on common sense.
I've never been a big fan of "common sense".
I prefer logical coherence.
(IFF) "racism" = "bad" because "hate" = "bad" (THEN) spending time focusing on "racism" and ignoring "hate" is missing the point.
AND
(IFF) "hate" = "bad" (AND) all books and movies and games that document "hate" in its various forms = "bad" (AND) any description of "hate" is intolerable (THEN) free-speech is dead.
We need to draw a clear distinction between THOUGHTS (descriptions/games) and ACTIONS.
We'll have to get a 'common sense' topic going sometime. I don't have the time to lay out my proof that common sense is also just Logic, applied automatically and unconsciously. Another time/thread :)
I also think anyone is free to hate whatever they choose. We already have laws for crimes, so that if anyone actually acted on their hate, in a manner that caused harm to another, they would face the consequences. Nobody gets to tell me what I have to hate, or what have have to not hate...
So yes you are correct, with that equation which is forced on us, renders free speech dead. I have proven this to others before when they push the fallacious "Hate Speech" weapon on anyone. They never care, for those who resort to tactics like using weaponized labels, also don't care about Virtue. So attempting to correct or show the correction to the violator, would be, as Thomas Paine (who ironically also penned "Common Sense") says:
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead"
I've been finding about a 1% response rate with the "closed minded", and that's actually enough to keep me going for the moment.
When most people say "common sense" I believe it would be more precise to say either "common knowledge" or "seems intuitive to me".
And while "common knowledge" and "personal intuition" can be useful at times, they are most often NOT the result of rigorous logical scrutiny (and often stand as a barrier to analysis).
sense sĕns►
n.
Any of the faculties by which stimuli from outside or inside the body are received and felt, as the faculties of hearing, sight, smell, touch, taste, and equilibrium.
n.
A perception or feeling produced by a stimulus; sensation.
The fact that we name it 'Common' doesn't necessarily mean that it is common for commoners. It simply means that it is available to anyone. How is it available, to anyone? Logic. By use of Logic. Applying logic, will produce a 'common' result, no matter the one applying it. As long as it is logical, it will be 'common'. So the way I see it is that if someone is not applying logic to situations, they will not have common sense. 'sense'. They can 'learn', but that is not really 'sense' is it?
Only (IFF) the people who are "reasoning" all agree on explicit primary AXIOMS.
The most common miscommunications are when people violently disagree about hackneyed conclusions, without first taking the time to hash out their definitions (PRIMARY AXIOMS).
What's referred to as "common sense" is almost inevitably what one party considers "obvious" and therefore either "goes without saying" (non-explicit) or is so "fundamental" it's "pointless to try and explain" (which is an appeal to ignorance).
Bingo.
Now, is it logical, to not first hash out the definitions?
I find a lot of people consider it "common sense" that it's a "waste of time" to try and make their definitions explicit.