The Abyss of Intellectual Fencing Online, Is it free speech or something more?

[togetherwecan]

In an era where rights are shrugged away by an administration bent on curbing dissent I have to wonder if that combined with the anonymity of the internet has possibly done us a disservice as a People. Where does free speech end and being an >-bleeped-< begin?

Let's step back a second and take a hard look at this. Does my right to free speech also afford me the right to offend or insult for the sake of offending or insulting? In a court of law I would imagine so, but in a court of our conscience does it make it right in the end? Do we evolve with compassion and the ability to be civil or do we allow the certainty of our disguise online to empower us into that alter ego we would rarely let loose in the real world?

Most message boards require one to attack the idea and not the person. Is this possible to do? I don't know. Often times I find myself not opining at all because it is difficult to separate one from the other when there is so much passion or faith put behind it. I ask myself if my disagreement would matter and encourage furthered learning or understanding on whatever the issue, or would my sarcasm or disdain merely stir a pot of distraction. Do I want to be the antagonist without a real agenda towards the cause?

I try to think in progressive terms in what I do. I am not always on target and I sometimes find myself in circular circumstances when I lose sight of what I hope to accomplish as an activist. I want to be better. I want to do better. I want to truly be a part of what makes a difference. The change begins and ends with us.


TWC

[The Middle Way]

What a thoughtful post!

Most message boards require one to attack the idea and not the person. Is this possible to do? ... or would my sarcasm or disdain merely stir a pot of distraction. Do I want to be the antagonist without a real agenda towards the cause?

TWC

Does it depend on how much investment the person/idea we take exception to has in their idea, too?
How important is opposing what we feel is a wrong idea, combined with a 'wrong' motivation?
Is it possible to take a step back and NOT employ the tone of sarcasm or disdain, in doing so? It's a hard one to do sometimes. How pure or real is the agenda? I think these are good questions.

none o'

[Sarah Louise]

I find the idea of Intellectual Fencing to be strange.  I thought we were here to discuss thoughts and ideas.  I am not here to "fence" with others and I don't think I respond any different online than I would in person.

Sarah L.

[The Middle Way]

"Is it free speech or something more?":

It is cheap speech.

[Melissa-kitty]

Discussing ideas is fun and interesting, but to quote Jewel, "in the end, only kindness matters." Stay true to yourself, TWC, you are so wonderful!
Namaste, Tara

[The Middle Way]

having got caught up in a stupid semantic thing with someone online, (and particularly finding that my lesser motivation caused a like reaction), though that totally wasn't the initial thrust, I found out for (virtually) real how abyss-like an argument might get.

I looked for a meditation or what-have-you, on it,  and found this, from a Chinese source, which may help someone, who knows:

When engaged in any activity we should ask this question: 'For what reason am I engaged in this activity?' If we are conscious that we are acting from some unworthy motive - because of discouragement, vexation, or some other evil instinct - we should cease the action. But if we are conscious that we are acting from some good motive, such as charity or some spiritual service, then we should go on with the activity. If we go on with the activity we should concentrate the mind on the pure activity with no ulterior purpose in mind. If we cease the activity, or the mind is disturbed by desires or angry or egoistic thoughts, then we should practice stopping. What is meant by this? It means that the mind should be tranquillized by getting rid of the thoughts which prompt the action. Action in itself is unwise as it lead to further multiplicity and increased confusion and dissatisfaction and suffering...

N

[Cindi Jones]

"Is it free speech or something more?":

It is cheap speech.

Cheap?  I'm paying 64 dollars a month for this "free speech"!  Oh.. and then there is the cost of the computer.  And who knows what other hidden costs are bellied up in taxes and what not.

The internet is an amazing thing.  It is the great equalizer.  How would I have ever met my friends here without it?  How would we begin to have the discussion let alone offend someone else?  I believe that "free" access to information may very well solve many problems that lead us to war some day.

I don't worry about offending someone.  I try my best to be thoughtful and polite.  If I somehow manage to screw something up after all that, I can muster an apology or two.  It's not hard. But the sharing of ideas and information (even though so much of it is opinionated and non factual) is amazing.

Cindi

[The Middle Way]

Well, huh, it is 'free' speech from here at [].org.

I meant the other kind of cheap, 'She looks SO cheap in those torn fishnet stockings'...

If I somehow manage to screw something up after all that, I can muster an apology or two.  It's not hard.

Love means never having to say you're sorry.

N

[togetherwecan]

I think a little thing called *common curtesy* goes a long way and to also quote Jewel *Lend our voices only to sounds of freedom, no longer give your strength to that which we want to be free from*.

I despise the fact out current government wants to take away our rights. I would not wish to do that to anyone. I only care that free speech is curbed with curtesy.


Together in the struggle!


TWC