5 ms·
Should persuasive speech* be outlawed? * Speech that benefits me but does not necessarily benefit you.
by pgayed 4y ago
Should persuasive speech* be outlawed?
* Speech that benefits me but does not necessarily benefit you.
- 082349872349872 4y agoWhat is a concrete example? When I think of persuasive speech, I think of A intending to convince B that C is proper policy — but this benefits both A and B, insofar as it should involve enlarging B's understanding of C, and is an attempt by A to uncover the truth of whether or not C is desirable. That is clearly protectable. If benefits A but does not necessarily benefit B means "A is trolling"[0], then that speech, while possibly entertaining[1], does not sound at all useful. Protection of trolls would have to rest under some other heading than "enlarging understanding" and "uncovering truth", as neither are true of them. Does that distinction make sense? Is it at all related to what you had in mind? [0] indeed, at this point the notion of "persuasive" becomes arguable, if A is the only person who might possibly defend their argument as plausible. [1] depending upon how it uncovers the truth that A is a jerk?