Preview

The Importance of Expression

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1257 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Importance of Expression
e Robert Suber Professor Gilbert Coon HMXP 102 31 February 2013
The Importance of Expression
“If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind”(Mill). This quote, by John Stuart Mill, is a quote that I originally disagreed with. Before reading the essay, I thought on all of the different examples in which the silencing of a certain opinion can be beneficial to the masses. A particular example that still sticks out to me is the silencing of the Westboro Baptist Church, a prolific hate group known for speaking out against marine funerals and picketing tragedies such as the Sandy Hook Massacre. How could such a volatile group of hate mongers possibly have any right to such opinions? But after reading a few different essays on the subject, and applying the opinions and logic of the authors into my daily life and other real world situations, I came to the conclusion that all ideas and opinions should be openly debated, respected, and tolerated regardless of how society views the subject matter, so as to enlighten and instill progress in mankind. In modern times, I have frequently noticed how quick people are to jump down the throats of those who do not share their similar opinion. A good example of this is the group of people I hang out with, who are all extremely liberal. As soon as I would make any commentary against certain controversial subjects, such as Affirmative Action and abortion, my friends would immediately disagree with everything I say. Instead of using proper etiquette in their arguments, they digress to sarcasm, name calling, and bias. To them, silencing my opinion is more important than enlightening me, and even if their intentions were to do so, the overly aggressive way in which they argue is extremely counterproductive. It was almost as if they viewed me as

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Mill begins his essay by expressing a concern with the amount of control that society can exert over an individual 's liberty. Mill is afraid of the "the tyranny of the majority"1 and suggests that one should protect himself not only from the tyranny of the state itself, but also from the prevailing opinions of the majority. He says that the opinions of the majority become the rules and laws…

    • 2441 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    For anyone to place a limit on an American's right to express or suspend one's right's, is to be very dubious in being an American themselves! "Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties." (John Milton, 1644) in that quote, Senator Robert M. La Follette uses it to defend his right to speak out against the war. Furthermore, for the right for the citizens of this country to discuss issues without fear.…

    • 192 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Stuart Mill, author of the chapter “Of the Liberty of Thought and Discussion” in the philosophical work On Liberty, outlines four main arguments of why society is impacted by the silencing of others’ opinions. Wayne Fuller, author of the chapter “Diffusion of Knowledge” in the work The American Mail: Englarger of the Common Life,” presents ideas that Mill would be able to apply his ideas to.…

    • 502 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Comparing Devlin to Mill.

    • 1787 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Mill perceives only one instance in which society is justified in interfering with or limiting the freedoms of its adult members, that being to prevent harm to others. Though Mill would…

    • 1787 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In today’s society, the first amendment is taken advantage of in many ways. Many people express that they can say whatever they please because they have the Freedom of Speech. They might burn the USA flag, make a racist remark, or some other kind of action, but what they do not realize is that this may hurt people. The First Amendment should be limited so that individuals can speak their mind so long as it does not hurt other people, or violates their rights.…

    • 445 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Overall, as Roger Rosenblatt stated and explained in his article defending the freedom of speech, the United States must not procreate censorship of any greater extent on its citizen’s voices. In fact, “The Founding Fathers…

    • 1325 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    As far as I’m concerned, the first important provision in the U.S. Bill of Rights is freedom of expression. A democracy depends on the free expression of ideas; totalitarian governments know this, which is why they go to the enormous trouble to limit expression. Americans pride themselves on their free and open society, freedom of conscience is absolute; American can believe whatever they want. The one thing all freedom of expression cases have in common is the question of whether a certain expression receives the protection of the Constitution.…

    • 255 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Stuart Mill Conformity

    • 581 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In the case of Snyder v. Phelps, Westboro Baptist Church revealed themselves as a hate group damning “fags” and their “associates” like the U.S. Army.2 Westboro’s despicable words and protests immediately labelled them as deviants - uninterested in societal norms and lacking respect for the diseased. Through Mill’s essay Of Individuality, it is evident that he wanted to prevent the mental harm of others caused by deviants use of individual liberty.5 Furthermore, Westboro’s ideas are outdated and discourage societal progress. However, Mill believed that these weren’t enough to silence the individual. Instead, by having a multiplicity of ideas and stances that can be openly voiced, we as a society are more progressive and…

    • 581 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Stuart Mill’s “On Liberty” discusses the freedom of and the freedom of expressing all opinions by saying that any of the opinions that are silenced could either be partially or fully true and, that’s why they could silenced. I do not agree with Mill on this aspects because, some opinions in a society should be silenced for many reasons other than the fact they might be true. As Mill states that all opinions should be permitted on the condition that they are temperate and contribute to the “bonds of fair discussion” (Mill, 774)…

    • 171 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Civil Liberties

    • 2318 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Mill’s argument from truth: If restrictions of speech are tolerated, society may prevent the ascertainment and publication of true facts and accurate judgments. This approach, associated with the famous judgment of Holmes J in Abrams v US 250 US 616 (1919) asserts that all truths are relative and they can only be judged ‘in the competition of the market’.…

    • 2318 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In other words, everyone has the right to express their thoughts. In fact, having an opinion should not create fear or doubt, but rather inspire changes in society. Holding back and creating silence prevents progress from being achieved and in some cases, results in conflicts to develop on its own. In other words, while speaking up creates lasting impacts, silence leads to…

    • 496 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In addition, John Stuart Mill addressed a very important topic that relates to the society and named the idea the harm principle. This states that the only actions that can be restricted are ones that constitute harm. These are the limitations Mills talks about when it comes to free speech. So the question is when can the government intervene? When can the authority of society rightly limit individuality? In Mill’s words, when can the government rightly limit “sovereignty of the individual over himself (Mill 63)?” If a person’s action only harms him then it does not require government intervention. In other words, the government does not have the right to prevent him from making those decisions. This rule sounds a little absurd because Mill makes it seem so easy to just let someone do whatever he or she wants regardless of how much harm that it is causing that individual. An…

    • 530 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    In the United States we have many freedoms that we as citizens possess. Freedom of speech is one of the freedoms we enjoy. But what is the meaning of the word “freedom”, and how free is our speech? The word free, according to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary means: having the legal and political rights of a citizen. With this in mind, it does not mean that we have the right to do and say as we please. The First Amendment states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” (The Constitution of The United States). The Citizens of the United States misinterpret the phase “Freedom of Speech” to suit their own needs and wants. In this essay we will discuss how our interpretation of our freedom is only a myth brought on by our selfish ways and thoughts and interpreted according to what we feel it means in the situations that fit best. The First Amendment has been interpreted by the Supreme Courts to only protect citizens in certain applications and situations and, not protect some companies and corporations nor does it offer to protect citizens of the United States from speaking against the government. Governmental agencies have twisted the first amendment to fit what the individuals of that particular agencies likes or dislikes, and their view of certain speakers.…

    • 1355 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Our thoughts should be able to liberate us. The fact that we are individual we should be free to express our opinions and say whatever we want without the public persecution. For Mill, we are free to do whatever we want with our lives, as long as it does not interfere with someone else life. Paternalism is acceptable for children, but not adult. For example, a parent might prevent his/her child from saying or seeing something. But society cannot tell an adult not to say this or that or not to comport a certain way that they wish. He said, “It is a privilege and proper condition of a human being arrived at the maturity of his faculties to use and interpret experience in his own way.” (Liberty 48). The government cannot tell anyone not to harm him/herself. But they can restrict them for harming someone else. Yet, looking at the real world the tyranny of the majority rules us and tells us what to do. Minorities don’t have a say-so in the matter. There’s not really liberty as mill described in his book. “there is no reason that all human existences should be constructed on someone or some small number of patterns…..human beings are not like sheep and even sheep are not indistinguishable ”(liberty 56). Mills was clear that individuals are unique and should be free to do what they wished. They should not be coerced to do what others want them to do otherwise; it is seen as restrictions on their liberty. Nevertheless, we always have society on the background restricting individual of their liberty. They restrict our liberty starting with what we are allowed to say in public and what we watch on the television and what we hear in the news. We think we have rights, but they shape our life in various…

    • 1103 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    George Washington once proclaimed that “If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter”-while many of us would not argue the right to freedom of speech we may start to question just how boundless freedom should really be. Throughout history, it has often been proven that words have the ability to translate into violent and often fatal actions, yet we continue to accept these actions in the name of free speech. Lawmakers continue to debate over the boundaries regarding freedom of speech and whether limitations would forward or suppress our supposedly dignified and civilized society. Humans seem to be sensitive species as social media comments, political speeches and satirical statements continue to spark controversy and dominate news headlines. Hate speech does not only put our community harmony at risk but also encourages violence as it interferes with other basic human rights to a safe and tolerant environment.…

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays