Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

journals.sagepub.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 506 posts

Re: Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

#181

Post by ethanbond »

glerk wrote: post #164
citizenkeen wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is perfectly in line with freedom of speech. Is the government showing up and arresting the speakers? No? Then freedom of speech is intact.

I’m so tired of this argument. Who cares if it’s the government, private business, or other citizens who do the censorship? The result is the same: censorship. Next you’re gonna tell me to go build my own university/social media platform/payment processor/ISP/etc. if I don’t like it.

Who cares who does it? Well, ermmm, the entire legal construct of free speech cares?

The government requiring Person A to platform Person B’s speech is a violation of person A’s rights.

Re: Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

#182

Post by preordained »

jimbokun wrote: post #102
marcopolo3333 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It still is a virtue and a right in the US. Freedom of speech is not about giving every idea and every person and equal platform to spread their ideas. It's not about forcing others to host/spread ideas they disagree with. I think the internet has given people a warped sense about what freedom of speech is. We have no less freedom of speech now than we did before social media/internet.

In practice, this means a small number of tech companies having final say over what ideas do or don't get spread.

Winner winner, chicken dinner. It's obvious that at a certain scale you shouldn't have as much license to censor, as you effectively become the public square. If you run Cathy's Cat forum where you have a thousand users and you want to decree pro cat speech all the time...be as dictatorial as you want.

Re: Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

#183

Post by hotpotamus »

illuminerdy wrote: post #119
hotpotamus wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/lawmakers-push-to-b... Don’t forget the 1619 Project.

On the contrary, we should all forget the "1619 Project".

I suspect that’s the point of restricting speech about it.

Re: Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

#184

Post by [deleted] »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #126
cortesoft wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not heard any group calling for free speech to be blocked. Who is calling for people to be arrested for what they say? Or to be blocked from being able to say it out loud? I think what you mean is that people are calling for internet platforms to kick out certain groups. This is in no way a call against freedom of speech. I am not sure why people suddenly believe that being for 'free speech' means that other p…

> I have not heard any group calling for free speech to be blocked. Who is calling for people to be arrested for what they say? The way it works is: "Sure I support free speech, but saying X is not free speech and saying it should be against the law because its offensive and might incite violence or something." If you object, they trot out Popper quotes about tolerating intolerance.

[deleted]

Re: Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

#185

Post by Georgelemental »

User23 wrote: post #86
P0l83q4p1Hw3Ul wrote: post #33

Is Freedom of Speech important for a democratic society to survive? Right wing extremists would say yes. In fact, this is why they believe we shouldn't allow low cognitive ability immigrants into the country or let them vote.

You said it in a tacky way, but the evidence does suggest that the average intelligence of a population is an important limiting factor in civilizational attainment. It’s necessary, but not sufficient. Likewise, the likelihood of a startup succeeding is gated by the intelligence of its employees. Successful founders know this and hire accordingly. I’ve yet to see a sound argument for why it’s ok for a company to disc…

> I’ve yet to see a sound argument for why it’s ok for a company to discriminate on intelligence, but not for a country to.

In the US, it's officially illegal for companies to discriminate based on intelligence, thanks to Griggs v. Duke Power.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/overturn-griggs-v-du...

Re: Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

#186

Post by [deleted] »

Dig1t wrote: post #55

I grew up in the US being told that freedom of speech was a virtue, something that our country did very well and I always thought that it was a shared value. It's very surprising to me to see that change in such a short span, or possibly it was not as popular or widespread as I thought it was growing up and I just never noticed. Is it the internet that has caused this uptick in the number of people who think free spe…

[deleted]

Re: Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

#187

Post by mantas »

happytoexplain wrote: post #36

In my experience, the notion of being "for or against freedom of speech" is actually referring to something more subjective, and that phrasing is used to imply which side of the disagreement the speaker believes is correct, like referring to the debate about abortion as the debate about murdering babies. It signals a strong bias.

Referring to abortion as women health issue is strong bias too. Some questions are biased on all sides.

Re: Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

#188

Post by dotnet00 »

rhexs wrote: post #64
Dig1t wrote: post #55

I grew up in the US being told that freedom of speech was a virtue, something that our country did very well and I always thought that it was a shared value. It's very surprising to me to see that change in such a short span, or possibly it was not as popular or widespread as I thought it was growing up and I just never noticed. Is it the internet that has caused this uptick in the number of people who think free spe…

How many immigrants do you think grew up the same way? Hint: almost none, as the United States is the only country that enshrines true freedom of speech as an unalienable and fundamental right. This is probably considered "hate-speech" in this day and age, but immigration, shockingly, has cons as well.

To be fair, well-integrated immigrants are also more likely to fervently value American freedoms much more than born Americans since they know what it's like to not have those freedoms and because people don't just go through the difficult immigration process without having some ideological affinity for the US. If it were just about quality of life, Canada, much of Europe, Australia etc are not that different and usually have easier immigration.

Re: Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

#189

Post by seydor »

wpietri wrote: post #173
seydor wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it did not have the legal consequence of depriving one of their money.

Your belief is that before the internet nobody ever got fired for something they said?

I believe classes of people have not systematically been demonetized because of their work or the morals of some other class in any liberal state. Yes

Re: Cognitive ability is related to supporting freedom of speech (2020)

#190

Post by ok_dad »

glerk wrote: post #164
citizenkeen wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is perfectly in line with freedom of speech. Is the government showing up and arresting the speakers? No? Then freedom of speech is intact.

I’m so tired of this argument. Who cares if it’s the government, private business, or other citizens who do the censorship? The result is the same: censorship. Next you’re gonna tell me to go build my own university/social media platform/payment processor/ISP/etc. if I don’t like it.

If the alternative is to force someone else to host and reproduce your views who doesn’t want to, then I’d say that’s acceptable. I’d you want a large platform on which to spout your views, you should secure that yourself. Your 1st amendment right is to stand on a soapbox in the town square and yell as loud as you want, and that’s all.
Post reply on HN