Liberty of Expression Analysis
The idea of Freedom of Expression is recognized as a fundamental right in the construction of the United States constitution. For centuries, philosophers have presented their viewpoints and rationalities on how the idea of freedom of expression should be handled and what qualities this right should embrace. Philosophers Ronald Dworkin and John Stuart Mill have both presented personal thoughts on the rationalization of liberty of expression, and why it is imperative that we as a society defend this right. Ronald Dworkin and John Stuart Mill both present similar ideas when focusing on this subject, stating that it is a vital aspect to the success of society, but also have differing viewpoints on whether these rights should be controlled in certain situations. Ronald Dworkin supports a society where speech is almost completely uninhibited and should only be limited within an extreme extenuating circumstance. However, while he fully supports the idea of freedom of speech, John Stuart Mill also supports his thought of the “Harm Principle”, and the idea that free speech should not infringe upon it and should be controlled if it does. Unlike the ideas of Dworkin, John Stewart Mill presents the ideas of situations which need to be controlled in every day circumstances; and while he supports the overall idea of freedom of speech, he recognizes the management which is required when the rights of one are affected by the actions of another, in due course creating a system that is superior to that of Dworkin’s in the role of society, while ultimately achieving the same goal of freedom of expression. John Stuart Mill is often recognized as the “Most influential English speaking philosopher of the nineteenth century”, and he made massive contributions to the ideas of social theory, political theory, and political economy. In Mill’s work On Liberty, he touches on the ideas of the rights of the common man, and limits of the power that the...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document