I’m skeptical whether the barriers between social and legal contexts are as strong as you seem to imply. Those contexts affect each other a lot. How we act in society affects how it evolves, and what laws are adopted.
If a friend confided in you that they were sexually assaulted, would you wait until this was confirmed in court before believing her? Do you hold back because you worry about how your actions may affect the legal principle of “presumption of innocence”, and how this affects what laws are adopted?
I see you’re focusing on a particular subset of cases. I think it’s also worth mentioning that in the majority of cases accusations are not made by friends. When I have limited knowledge about those involved, I tend to uphold stricter standards.
In the case where it is a friend, I’d assume those who I call friends are honest people (with sufficient mental health as to make accurate claims), so I think I’d tend to believe them in the sense of updating beyond a significant threshold. Although, I’ve also made the mistake of misjudging my friends’ honesty in the past, so I might be careful not to be overly confident in my beliefs.
I’m mainly responding to your point that “social and legal contexts affect each other a lot...” etc, and illustrating the point that legal principles and standards are often not (and should not be) the standards that are upheld in day-to-day life. Would you expect the community health team to only take action if accusations could be supported to a legal standard?
in the majority of cases accusations are not made by friends
I agree that legal standards and standards upheld in day-to-day life shouldn’t be the same, but some of the ‘willingness to believe bad things happened’ I’m seeing in the social groups that EA draws from seems a bit immoderate, so I’m cautious of straying too far from those stricter standards (and straying too far also has a risk of undermining them).
To answer your other question (which you have now deleted), I downvoted your first comment instead of disagree-voting because it appeared to me that you were concentrating on instances where we evaluate accusations made by friends, to the exclusion of the vast majority of situations where we evaluate accusations made by individuals who are not friends (fyi, just so it’s less confusing—I make a distinction between friends and acquaintances, and EA seems big enough that not everyone can be considered a friend). That made your comment potentially misleading. However, I do I agree with your comment in that I should believe a friend’s accusations (unless it turns out I’m a poor judge of character).
I now realize that by asking about what I meant by “the majority of cases accusations are not made by friends,” you indicate that you did not make that distinction as I did.
If a friend confided in you that they were sexually assaulted, would you wait until this was confirmed in court before believing her? Do you hold back because you worry about how your actions may affect the legal principle of “presumption of innocence”, and how this affects what laws are adopted?
I see you’re focusing on a particular subset of cases. I think it’s also worth mentioning that in the majority of cases accusations are not made by friends. When I have limited knowledge about those involved, I tend to uphold stricter standards.
In the case where it is a friend, I’d assume those who I call friends are honest people (with sufficient mental health as to make accurate claims), so I think I’d tend to believe them in the sense of updating beyond a significant threshold. Although, I’ve also made the mistake of misjudging my friends’ honesty in the past, so I might be careful not to be overly confident in my beliefs.
I’m mainly responding to your point that “social and legal contexts affect each other a lot...” etc, and illustrating the point that legal principles and standards are often not (and should not be) the standards that are upheld in day-to-day life. Would you expect the community health team to only take action if accusations could be supported to a legal standard?
What do you mean by this sorry?
I agree that legal standards and standards upheld in day-to-day life shouldn’t be the same, but some of the ‘willingness to believe bad things happened’ I’m seeing in the social groups that EA draws from seems a bit immoderate, so I’m cautious of straying too far from those stricter standards (and straying too far also has a risk of undermining them).
To answer your other question (which you have now deleted), I downvoted your first comment instead of disagree-voting because it appeared to me that you were concentrating on instances where we evaluate accusations made by friends, to the exclusion of the vast majority of situations where we evaluate accusations made by individuals who are not friends (fyi, just so it’s less confusing—I make a distinction between friends and acquaintances, and EA seems big enough that not everyone can be considered a friend). That made your comment potentially misleading. However, I do I agree with your comment in that I should believe a friend’s accusations (unless it turns out I’m a poor judge of character).
I now realize that by asking about what I meant by “the majority of cases accusations are not made by friends,” you indicate that you did not make that distinction as I did.