Je Suis Charlie

[Era Might]

Hebdo lampooned everything. All religions, politics, and economic systems. Freedom of speech is ultimately freedom to disagree. Violent disagreement is what diminishes humanity. I would argue that stifling speech is violence against ideas.

 

I agree, but freedom of speech is specific to our social context. I don't think freedom of speech, in our sense, is anything natural, it's something we've created in the context of a society where the only "real" thing is the technical functioning of a system. Our idea of government/society is as a neutral technique, not to accomplish anything, but simply to keep everything flowing and functioning smoothly (speech, commerce, etc.). And even then, we still have limits to freedom of speech, but we do the policing ourselves...through the media we acknowledge, through who we publish/recognize, etc. Freedom of speech is a structure, not anything in itself...how we use it is the only thing that determines what kind of society/culture we have. I don't think we view freedom of speech as a vehicle to welcome everything, but simply as a technique to prevent slaughter, whether of this sort in Paris, or of older sorts, of the ancien regime.

[Era Might]

I'm just thinking out loud, not sure what I'm saying. I think my main point is just that I am not Charlie, I don't believe in communication as an irrelevant thing and "freedom of speech" the only value. To speak anything is to make a claim in the world, and I don't think "freedom of speech" is much of an answer to any of this, except on the level of law/rights. There's an episode of "Arrested Development" where they go to protest a military base, and they get stuck in a fenced in area where they're just protesting to the wind...that's freedom of speech, I guess, but without a real-world context, where the purpose is to affect the world, I don't know what value that has except to uphold the general right to speak.

Edited January 9, 2015 by Era Might

[Winchester]

Freedom of speech simply means it is not legal for anyone to attack you over mere words. It doesn't mean people won't. It doesn't mean that if you taunt psychopaths that they won't kill you.

 

Only that it won't be legal to do so.

[Era Might]

 

Freedom of speech simply means it is not legal for anyone to attack you over mere words. It doesn't mean people won't. It doesn't mean that if you taunt psychopaths that they won't kill you.

 

Only that it won't be legal to do so.

 

But what is speech except premeditation to action. To lampoon anything is to lay the ideological groundwork for a world where those things are irrelevant and destroyed. To lampoon Muhammad is to call for the destruction of Islam as a social idea (as is lampooning the Pope, for example, to destroy the Papacy as a social idea). To put down someone/something with words is to attempt to affect their being in the world (to make them be inferior in society, etc.). To defend/propose revolution is to commit revolution, no? It seems like Freedom of Speech, while it has opened up a neutral space to speak, has also made speech meaningless, just decoration to the "real" business of society which is law and order.

 

In the context of religion, it's true that Catholics generally don't kill to defend the Pope, but that's mainly because they have already accepted the irrelevancy of the Papacy, they only believe it on on an abstract level. Back in the old days, when they did believe in it, the honor of the church was worth killing and dying for, as Islam remains to many.

 

[Winchester]

Speech leaves open exercise of the will. It is not the same thing as a gun in the ribs.

[Era Might]

Speech leaves open exercise of the will. It is not the same thing as a gun in the ribs.

 

Then it is meaningless. I think it is exactly the same as a gun in the ribs, because everything we express is a statement that we exist in the world, not in ideas. To think anything is itself an act of the will, a judgment that what exists and how we experience it is lacking, and we must assert meaning by thinking and speaking. To tell a wife, for example, "you're beautiful" or "you're fat" is to change the world for her, it's not just an idea, it is an act in the world. I think Christ was on to something when he said you will have to render account for every word you utter. That's how serious and real speech is.

[Didacus]

I'm surprised nobody had started a Topic on the attack in Paris.

A consequence of their own actions?

Too much outrage?

An example if the fundamental intolerance of Islam?

Je Suis Charlie just another trendy Western fad?

Any way similar to North Korea's attack on Sony Pictures?

How important is freedom of speech when it's rude, crass, or offensive?

​Maybe no one talks about it out of respect for Islam. 

 

The last thing Islam needs is another reason for christians to hate it.