Comments on: Psychological Harm and Free Speech on Campus http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/ Free Markets and Social Justice Mon, 22 Jan 2018 23:15:00 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.2 By: Lacunaria http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/#comment-81037 Sat, 15 Jul 2017 16:37:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=11915#comment-81037 I agree with you. There are lots of groupings which can provide useful correlations, but it seems to me that (in addition to historical grievances) one reason we end up talking about race and gender so much is because we are being explicitly shamed when we point out or utilize correlations with those groups. Perhaps it’s a kind of vicious cycle, like news and politics, where focus begets more focus and increased sensitivity and polarization.

]]>
By: Dmitry A. Chernikov http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/#comment-81000 Thu, 13 Jul 2017 20:49:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=11915#comment-81000 In the second case, the black guy would alarm me slightly more. One reason for it is that the black guy would probably hate me more for being white.

In any case, what accounts for the fact that a greater % of blacks wear hoodies in high crime neighborhoods than of whites? Why are there more bad black neighborhoods than bad white neighborhoods, and how might this disparity be used to craft reasonable public policy?

]]>
By: Dmitry A. Chernikov http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/#comment-80998 Thu, 13 Jul 2017 20:10:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=11915#comment-80998 In other words, there is a difference between “apprehension of the truth” (such as “understanding”) and “judgment according to truth” (such as “wisdom”).

Saying, “These two suck each other’s dicks,” is uttering a true or false proposition. Saying further, “Filth!” is making a wise or foolish judgment.

I agree that one should make public judgments prudently. Minding one’s own business is a definite virtue. But no restrictions, including of shows of contempt, should be placed on expressing truths.

]]>
By: Dmitry A. Chernikov http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/#comment-80994 Thu, 13 Jul 2017 16:00:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=11915#comment-80994 Let Smith despise Jones. Theresa appears and tells Smith that she despises him for despising Jones. Either way, contempt is felt and expressed by someone. Why then does Theresa feel justified in her emotion, and why is Smith not justified?

In any case, political correctness is not about radically de-communizing society, so no Smith shall judge any Jones or through such judging influence Jones’ behavior. It’s about forbidding Smith to tell unflattering to Jones truths.

]]>
By: Sean II http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/#comment-80993 Thu, 13 Jul 2017 14:46:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=11915#comment-80993 Never said you were motivated by that. I’m well aware you’re not a utilitarian. That’s very clear.

]]>
By: Theresa Klein http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/#comment-80992 Thu, 13 Jul 2017 14:27:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=11915#comment-80992 It’s entailed by your belief that I am motivated by aggregate outcome disparities between blacks and whites. I’m not. I DON’T CARE about aggregate outcome disparities. And I DON’T CARE about aggregate differences in ability. It’s entirely irrelevant to the question of whether individuals get treated fairly and justly by other individuals. I’m motivated principles of justice, fairness and harm in interactions between individuals, and by what sort of social norms will produce a society where people treat each other fairly and justly on an individual level. That MIGHT have some sort of effect on racial outcome disparities, but it might not. And it’s not good or bad BECAUSE it has positive effects on aggregate outcomes, it’s good or bad because individuals have, or should have, an intrinsic right to be treated justly by others. We should have a society where people treat each other fairly and justly, because that is a good thing in itself, regardless of whether it has any effect on aggregate differences in outcome among racial groups.

]]>
By: Theresa Klein http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/#comment-80990 Thu, 13 Jul 2017 14:05:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=11915#comment-80990 I don’t see where you get the haughty contempt for your views from. I’ve expressed some contempt for racially prejudiced attitudes. If you feel that applies to you, then that’s your perception that you fit in that category.

]]>
By: Sean II http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/#comment-80969 Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=11915#comment-80969 “My commitment to moral individualism is NOT based on utilitarian concerns…”

I never said it was. I never said anything like that.

]]>
By: Theresa Klein http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/#comment-80968 Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:34:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=11915#comment-80968 No, let me try to put this a different way. My commitment to moral individualism is NOT based on utilitarian concerns about the effect on aggregate outcomes or on society as a collective. My concern is based on the effects on individual liberty.
To put it another way, you keep responding as if i’m arguing that justice = abs(mean(ability_i) – mean(outcome_i)) where i is the group, when what I’m actually arguing is that justice = sum(abs(ability_i-outcome_i)) where i is the individual.
You keep acting as if I care about aggregate group differences in outcomes. I don’t care. I care about whether individuals get outcomes that are correlated to their individual merit.

]]>
By: Sean II http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/2017/07/psychological-harm-free-speech-campus/#comment-80962 Wed, 12 Jul 2017 16:16:00 +0000 http://bleedingheartlibertarians.com/?p=11915#comment-80962 I covered your commitment to moral and methodological individualism in point 2) above. Touched it again a bit in point 3).

]]>