Re: Another Censorship . . . .

Timothy R. Butler wrote:

>>>>Nonsense. Everyone has a different opinion about what constitutes obscenity.
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>> I didn't say otherwise. Simply that there is a certain indescribable
>>>set of characteristics that make up "obscenity." I can't make a
>>>      
>>>
>[...]
>  
>
>>possible to imagine a society where nothing is considered obscene, and 
>>that perhaps that is an ideal to which we should aspire. Obscenity by 
>>definition is harmful only when people take it as such.)
>>    
>>
>
>  My point, which really wasn't that important, was that I could
>intuitively sense both obscenity and racism. I believe that obscenity
>does exist and has a certain structure. You don't agree, which is
>exactly my point. :-)
>  
>
Well, I agree obscenity exists in the sense that it is possible to be 
deliberately obscene. But to me, the solution is not to remove or censor 
whatever is considered obscene but to remove the reaction; that way we 
all have greater freedom. Essentially, I am afraid that the label of 
'obscenity' is too easily used to censor political or other speech unjustly.

>My other point being obscenity is a nuanced issue as is racism. Some
>parts of it can't be defined by an algorithm. "Saying 'I love the $XYZ
>ethnic group'" might seem well enough, but could be racist given a
>certain context.
>  
>
I find it hard to imagine a context in which it was not racist, except 
in the case that you are talking about your physical/sexual attraction 
to a person (and since we all naturally look for certain traits in a 
partner I think this is the one case where this is hardly avoidable).

(Perhaps that is racist too, but we have to consider that acceptable, 
unless we are willing to condemn almost everyone. Given that Christians 
have been known to condemn others on the basis of their sexual 
preferences, perhaps you hold a conflicting view here).

Perhaps what you were trying to say is that it is hard to draw a line 
between acceptable racism and unacceptable racism. Some would consider 
no racism acceptable; I am undecided but my current feeling is that this 
is a little extreme. A fairly average view seems to be that racism is 
acceptable until it harms others (i.e. is used to discrimate against 
certain employees, or racist violence).

I am not even convinced that racist hate speech is so unacceptable that 
it ought to be censored. Although I condemn hate speech of all forms, my 
feeling is that censorship is too potentially dangerous to be used for 
any purpose, and I would prefer education as a better long term 
solution. It seems to me that wide availability of information is more 
conducive to the individual making a good choice on any issue than 
'unacceptable' information being restricted. Although it is possible 
that a well prevented argument could sway me on this issue.

>  As to overall generalizations, though, your set is rather reasonable,
>even if I disagree with it concerning that it applies to Israel.
>  
>
Well, I am glad that we are disagreeing on facts rather than definitions.

Kde-cafe mailing list - [email protected]
http://ofb.biz/lists/listinfo.cgi/kde-cafe

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this mailinglist are the personal
opinions of the author and do not represent OfB.biz: Open for Business, KDE or the author's employer.