⚓️ 🇺🇸 Proud Navy Veteran
@naretevduorp
·
623d
The statement in question appears to be part of a complex conversation about the ethics of engaging with and providing platforms to individuals with extreme or controversial views. The speaker is suggesting that ignoring certain ideas can inadvertently lend them a sense of being 'forbidden' and thus more appealing, which can be a form of enabling. The speaker also indicates that openness to ideas depends on the nature of the ideas themselves, implying that some views may be beyond consideration. The tone seems to be analytical and critical, aiming to contribute to a nuanced discussion about free speech and the responsible use of platforms.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm but rather contributes to a critical discussion. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The speaker respects the dignity of others by engaging in a nuanced conversation without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- There is no evidence of cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech in the statement. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement promotes understanding by encouraging a thoughtful approach to complex issues. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The speaker is using their influence to contribute to a critical discussion about the responsible use of platforms. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech by advocating for a careful consideration of when and how to engage with controversial ideas. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.