Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'swearing'.
Found 2 results
-
Powder and I have been discussing whether verbal abuse intrudes on the Non-Aggression Principle, and what response it may justify. Verbal abuse, as in swearing, libel, defamation, insults, and labeling. We are excluding threats, because we both agree that threats violate the NAP. My argument is that just like actual threats, to defame someone's character may lead to escalation of abuse, and the risk of physical harm. My example was a person being called "a terrorist." We all know how such a label can destroy human life. Powder's argument is that since this does not directly involve the "initiation of force" or "violation of property", then even if there is a justification for a defensive response, the entire situation is not included within the NAP. Does the 'initiation of force' include verbal abuse? Are insults akin to threats? What is a justified response to insults, and to what extent?
-
So while I've been a member for a while this is my first time actually interacting with you lovely people. The first thing I read in the forum was that Stef, in 2009, had closed the topic of Determinism. I don't think it was his fault... Now my question: I've read through the Guidelines and I don't find anything objectionable save for the vagueness (or perhaps not) of "No Swearing". Is this specific to the words themselves or their use? I have a broad verbal palette but understand that not all language fits everyone's taste. Please let me know. Thanks.
