Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-10-2013, 08:05 AM
Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
I came across this piece of qutation today.

When young Benjamin Franklin took over the newspaper New England Courant from his half-brother James who was jailed for criticizing the British authorities, he courageously printed a quotation from a London newspaper: “Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty without freedom of speech; which is the right of every man as far as by it if he does not hurt or control the right of another.”

Out of pure curiosity:

[1] Which part do you prefer, the part including “without freedom of speech” and before it, or the part including “which is the right” and after it, if you do have a preference ?

[2] If you prefer the latter part, what do you think “as far as by it if he does not hurt or control the right of another” specifically should mean ?

Want something? Then do something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-10-2013, 08:49 AM
RE: Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
The parts go together.

It is the essence of secular morality...

My right to wave my arms around ends at the tip of your nose.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like DLJ's post
08-10-2013, 09:18 AM
RE: Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
I saw this quote on Facebook recently and it left out the latter part...

Atheism is the only way to truly be free from sin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-10-2013, 12:43 PM
RE: Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
(08-10-2013 08:05 AM)HU.Junyuan Wrote:  I came across this piece of qutation today.

When young Benjamin Franklin took over the newspaper New England Courant from his half-brother James who was jailed for criticizing the British authorities, he courageously printed a quotation from a London newspaper: “Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty without freedom of speech; which is the right of every man as far as by it if he does not hurt or control the right of another.”

Out of pure curiosity:

[1] Which part do you prefer, the part including “without freedom of speech” and before it, or the part including “which is the right” and after it, if you do have a preference ?

[2] If you prefer the latter part, what do you think “as far as by it if he does not hurt or control the right of another” specifically should mean ?

The language of that time can be a bit tedious for some, it's possible you may be having trouble understanding that last part.... I'll attempt to translate:

"... and no such thing as public liberty without freedom of speech; which is the right of every man as far as by it (it, meaning; freedom of speach) he does not hurt or control the right of another."

so... freedom of speech is the right of every human so long as that human does not use that freedom to hurt or control the freedoms of another.

Hope that helps with a better understanding.

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-10-2013, 09:59 PM
RE: Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
(08-10-2013 08:49 AM)DLJ Wrote:  The parts go together.

It is the essence of secular morality...

My right to wave my arms around ends at the tip of your nose.

Not so. What about waving in front of a drivers face? Or when someone is crossing the road? Or any location or event that requires restraint, safety, etc. Or "fake punching" pedestrians, or children.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 01:06 AM
RE: Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
(08-10-2013 09:59 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  
(08-10-2013 08:49 AM)DLJ Wrote:  The parts go together.

It is the essence of secular morality...

My right to wave my arms around ends at the tip of your nose.

Not so. What about waving in front of a drivers face? Or when someone is crossing the road? Or any location or event that requires restraint, safety, etc. Or "fake punching" pedestrians, or children.

Dude, your Asperger is showing.

Tongue

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
09-10-2013, 03:17 PM
RE: Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
(09-10-2013 01:06 AM)DLJ Wrote:  
(08-10-2013 09:59 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  Not so. What about waving in front of a drivers face? Or when someone is crossing the road? Or any location or event that requires restraint, safety, etc. Or "fake punching" pedestrians, or children.

Dude, your Asperger is showing.

Tongue

Something something ad hominem Rolleyes

It's ridiculous (and dangerous) to say you can do whatever you like as long as you don't "touch" someone.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 03:20 PM
RE: Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
(09-10-2013 03:17 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  
(09-10-2013 01:06 AM)DLJ Wrote:  Dude, your Asperger is showing.

Tongue

Something something ad hominem Rolleyes

It's ridiculous (and dangerous) to say you can do whatever you like as long as you don't "touch" someone.

Methinks you need not take the saying quite so literally.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 03:25 PM
RE: Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
(09-10-2013 03:20 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  
(09-10-2013 03:17 PM)PoolBoyG Wrote:  Something something ad hominem Rolleyes

It's ridiculous (and dangerous) to say you can do whatever you like as long as you don't "touch" someone.

Methinks you need not take the saying quite so literally.

The problem lies with portions of society who DO take it literally. Stop being so contrarian and just agree with me already Dodgy
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-10-2013, 03:33 PM
RE: Questions about a piece of Benjamin Franklin's quotation
The first part without the, “as far as by it if he does not hurt or control the right of another”

Freedom is absolute. Any restriction ends freedom.

And as far as examples about waving your hands in front of someone's face. Until there's a real victim, who's the victim? And which agent of the government would you call to demand intervention? Or does hand waving equal violence, and violence should always be met with violence, so just punch a guy in the mouth for waving his arms?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: