食谱,计划,说明,和自由言论的含义的词是工具

F. Schauer
{"title":"食谱,计划,说明,和自由言论的含义的词是工具","authors":"F. Schauer","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780190883591.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter investigates whether speech acts of urging, advising, recommending, instructing, and informing ought all to be treated in the same way for purposes of implementing a principle of freedom of speech, and asks: If not, how do we justify treating them differently? This problem is arguably more pressing than it has been in the past, as the internet and various forms of social media have seemingly caused the mass distribution of instructions for committing antisocial acts have proliferated. After discussion of examples of publications that allow the reader to acquire knowledge on how to engage in dangerous activities, the chapter concludes that the normative and philosophical questions about the relationship between freedom of speech and the provision of instructions, plans, recipes, and detailed facts are in the final analysis less philosophical than they are empirical and social scientific.","PeriodicalId":359550,"journal":{"name":"Free Speech in the Digital Age","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Recipes, Plans, Instructions, and the Free Speech Implications of Words That Are Tools\",\"authors\":\"F. Schauer\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OSO/9780190883591.003.0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter investigates whether speech acts of urging, advising, recommending, instructing, and informing ought all to be treated in the same way for purposes of implementing a principle of freedom of speech, and asks: If not, how do we justify treating them differently? This problem is arguably more pressing than it has been in the past, as the internet and various forms of social media have seemingly caused the mass distribution of instructions for committing antisocial acts have proliferated. After discussion of examples of publications that allow the reader to acquire knowledge on how to engage in dangerous activities, the chapter concludes that the normative and philosophical questions about the relationship between freedom of speech and the provision of instructions, plans, recipes, and detailed facts are in the final analysis less philosophical than they are empirical and social scientific.\",\"PeriodicalId\":359550,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Free Speech in the Digital Age\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Free Speech in the Digital Age\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780190883591.003.0005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Free Speech in the Digital Age","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780190883591.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

这一章调查了为了实现言论自由的原则,敦促、建议、推荐、指导和通知等言论行为是否都应该以同样的方式对待,并问道:如果不是,我们如何证明区别对待它们是合理的?这个问题可以说比以往任何时候都更加紧迫,因为互联网和各种形式的社交媒体似乎导致了反社会行为的大量传播。在讨论了让读者获得如何从事危险活动的知识的出版物的例子之后,本章总结说,关于言论自由与提供指示、计划、食谱和详细事实之间关系的规范性和哲学问题,归根结底,与其说是哲学问题,不如说它们是经验主义和社会科学问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Recipes, Plans, Instructions, and the Free Speech Implications of Words That Are Tools
This chapter investigates whether speech acts of urging, advising, recommending, instructing, and informing ought all to be treated in the same way for purposes of implementing a principle of freedom of speech, and asks: If not, how do we justify treating them differently? This problem is arguably more pressing than it has been in the past, as the internet and various forms of social media have seemingly caused the mass distribution of instructions for committing antisocial acts have proliferated. After discussion of examples of publications that allow the reader to acquire knowledge on how to engage in dangerous activities, the chapter concludes that the normative and philosophical questions about the relationship between freedom of speech and the provision of instructions, plans, recipes, and detailed facts are in the final analysis less philosophical than they are empirical and social scientific.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信