Timeline for Are there lies that can be punished without any demonstrated harm?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 15 at 12:44 | comment | added | jwenting | @stackoverblown then that answers the question... The question was whether harm needs to be done before punishment can ensue. The answer is yes. You however didn't answer the question | |
| Feb 15 at 10:03 | comment | added | stackoverblown | @jwenting There is such a thing as reckless endangerment. | |
| Feb 15 at 4:45 | comment | added | jwenting | @stackoverblown irrelevant. The question was whether something can be punished when no harm was done. No harm was done YET so the answer is yes. | |
| Feb 14 at 15:30 | comment | added | EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine | Also, based on the second-to-last paragraph, it looks like the court did consider the fact that it was dangerous in the specified dose when ruling that it was misbranded. The court didn't rule on whether it would be safe or effective in lower doses than the dose recommended on the packaging, but they did hold that it was dangerous and ineffective for its specified purpose at the specified dose and was therefore misbranded. | |
| Feb 14 at 15:16 | comment | added | EJoshuaS - Stand with Ukraine | Misbranding arguably is a harmful lie. It would likely affect the purchasing decision of consumers. First, they may not be willing to purchase the product at all in light of accurate of information about it. Secondly, it could affect the price that they were willing to pay for it. | |
| Feb 13 at 22:48 | comment | added | kaya3 | @Kevin Yes, it does. I was responding to your critics. | |
| Feb 13 at 22:47 | comment | added | Kevin | @kaya3: My answer satisfies that standard? Neither of the two cases I cite involved the court determining that a specific individual (or class of individuals) had been harmed. | |
| Feb 13 at 22:45 | comment | added | kaya3 | It may or may not be true that all deception is harmful, but the question asks whether lies can be punished without demonstrated harm. Not whether harmless lies can be punished, but whether lies can be punished without being determined by the court to be harmful. | |
| Feb 13 at 19:15 | comment | added | ohwilleke | Misbranding implies harm to a competitor that is properly branded. | |
| Feb 13 at 7:56 | comment | added | Kevin | @gerrit: I literally just responded to the "all deception is harmful" argument. You do not need to make it more specific by highlighting consumers in particular - that doesn't change my response. | |
| Feb 13 at 6:16 | comment | added | Kevin | @JoL: Yes, we can reduce this to absurdity. All deception violates Kant's categorical imperative, so all deception is harmful, so the question is self-contradictory. But then you wouldn't have learned about Mrs. Moffat's Shoo Fly Powders, so aren't you happy I adopted a narrower definition? | |
| Feb 13 at 4:56 | comment | added | JoL | This answer seems to assume "harm" means "bodily harm", but the question body also uses "detriment", which I think is quite general. A misbranding of vinegar with regards to its quality could be considered somewhat like fraud, right? That would be financially harmful, because the buyer wouldn't be getting the quality they paid for. | |
| Feb 12 at 14:15 | comment | added | Idran | @stackoverblown But as the answer points out, the final judgment was based solely on the fact that it was misbranded, not that the substance was potentially harmful. That is to say, the court's statement is that the same ruling should apply in similar cases in the future even if the product in question isn't harmful. | |
| Feb 12 at 13:16 | comment | added | OpenAI was the last straw | The real question is "Who in their right mind would say '11¼ dozen' instead of '135?'" | |
| Feb 12 at 13:11 | comment | added | stackoverblown | This is different. It is illogically for someone to be harmed first before a stop is put to it if the substance is known to be dangerous to begin with. | |
| Feb 12 at 4:04 | history | edited | Kevin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 127 characters in body
|
| Feb 12 at 3:57 | history | answered | Kevin | CC BY-SA 4.0 |