I always thought this is why things in your mind are safe. The reason never seemed philosophical to me, simply that there is no way to prove the difference between not knowing and not telling.
> I always thought this is why things in your mind are safe. The reason never seemed philosophical to me, simply that there is no way to prove the difference between not knowing and not telling.
This seems like a natural but dangerous argument to make in a world where we are attempting to determine the states of people's minds externally. Even if we could tell the difference between lying and ignorance, is nothing sacred?
I see it more as not letting constraints stay because they simply weren't possible in the past. Previously surgeons considered chest cavity surgeries forever out of reach because of the foregone infection risk even with clean tools - antibiotics changed that.
There are still good reasons to object. Not going mind diving willy nilly has many other reasons, said invasiveness is both horrifyingly abusable and unduly stressful to the subject.
