A counterfactual situation whose consequent is a death threat may still be a death threat, depending on your jurisdiction.
The facility with which free exercise (free speech) would be applied to this particular dialogue leaves me sufficiently confident that I have absolutely no legal concerns to worry about whatsoever. The entire nature of counterfactual dialogue is such that you are making it clear that you are not associating the topic discussed with any particular reality. I.e.; you are not actually advocating it.
And, frankly, if LW isn’t prepared to discuss the “harder” questions of how to apply our morality in such murky waters, and is only going to reserve itself to the “low-hanging fruit”—well… I’m fully justified in being disappointed in the community.
I expect better, you see, of a community that prides itself on “claiming” the term “rationalist”.
The facility with which free exercise (free speech) would be applied to this particular dialogue leaves me sufficiently confident that I have absolutely no legal concerns to worry about whatsoever. The entire nature of counterfactual dialogue is such that you are making it clear that you are not associating the topic discussed with any particular reality. I.e.; you are not actually advocating it.
And, frankly, if LW isn’t prepared to discuss the “harder” questions of how to apply our morality in such murky waters, and is only going to reserve itself to the “low-hanging fruit”—well… I’m fully justified in being disappointed in the community.
I expect better, you see, of a community that prides itself on “claiming” the term “rationalist”.