Preview

What is the best argument for freedom of speech?

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1503 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
What is the best argument for freedom of speech?
Freedom of speech and the liberty to uphold one’s expression has long been the subject of many debates. It has taken centuries if not years for mankind to come to a point where many can easily voice their opinions without having to ponder over the consequences. But one should always know where to draw the line. Freedom of expression also needs to have its limits. Two of the masterminds who put forth their work on liberty and freedom of speech were John Stuart Mill and Jean-Jacque Rousseau. The concepts penned by Rousseau contradict those that were constructed by Mil; while the former focused on the functioning of the society as a whole, the latter advocated the rights of the individual to his freedom.

Mill basically argument in his piece ‘On Liberty’ allows for Utilitarian approach. His main idea was to give society and human nature a complete independence to mature and expand in infinite ways and direction. The main idea revolved around the kind of power that can be placed upon the individual by the society, and how that power was wrong unless exercised in self-defense. In particular, minorities were often the ones being oppressed. Mill pointed out that this tyrannical behavior was being supported by the major thinkers of that day. Public opinion followed the opinion of these thinkers and hence ended up doing the same. ‘On Liberty’ sought to diminish the power the society had over an individual’s freedom by giving that individual the freedom of speech. It was identified through the works that most people had precedent and preference which further provoked dissent and thus pressurized people. Mill also noted that there was no way of judging people on their interference into another person’s private affairs.

Mill’s idea of complete and total independence from society is contradicted in Rousseau’s works ‘The Social Contract,’ according to which man was restricted by the state and society that he existed in, once he became a part of the land he gave up the right



Cited: ousseau 's 'Social Contract 'Rousseau 's 'Discourse on Inequality 'Mill 's 'On Liberty '

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Better Essays

    Mill vs Dostoevsky

    • 1061 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Mill’s core assumption of man is that he is a rational being who will strive to maximize his own utility. “I regard utility as the ultimate appeal… on the permanent interests of man as a progressive being.” (Mill. On Liberty. Trans. Rapaport. 10). He believes man is naturally geared towards good. He believes man will always act towards his own advantage. He believes, if allowed to, man will only move in one direction; forward. Mill believes that human development and therefore the overall progression of society is best fostered in an atmosphere of complete freedom. This is a very optimistic assumption that does not dig deep into the human psyche. His model of a utopian society does not accommodate someone with a more complex, ambivalent psyche, such as that of the “Underground Man”. An irrational man. A man who will act against his own self interest. A man who is constantly at war with himself. A more realistic version of man.…

    • 1061 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the Social Contract, Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s key viewpoint is that all men are born free, but end up being in chains everywhere in the course of their lives (Rousseau and Cole 2 ). Rousseau argues that modern political states repress the basic freedoms which men possess as their birthright. These political states then lead men into the civil society in which the civil freedoms of men are not secure. Most importantly, Rousseau points out that the legitimacy of political authority can only be a product of social that all citizens agree upon motivated by the need for mutual preservation. Throughout the book, Rousseau makes key distinctions that make the basis of the discussions in this essay.…

    • 799 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    John Stuart Mill once said, “The amount of eccentricity in a society has generally been proportional to the amount of genius, mental vigor, and moral courage it contained. That so few now dare to be eccentric marks the chief danger of the time.” John Stuart Mill is one of the most prominent English-speaking philosophers during the 19th century. His works incorporated a huge range of topics in his articles and papers he has written, in which a few of them include A System of Logic, On Liberty, and Utilitarianism. Mill’s main goal when composing On Liberty was best seen by taking a gander at how he talked about his work in his Autobiography. Mill composed that he accepted On Liberty to show the significance to man and to the society, of an extensive variety on sorts of character, and the opportunity given to human instinct to extend itself in…

    • 1470 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • 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

    Mill's argues for the Harm Principle based on liberty. He says that liberty must be protected and that is why we must follow the Harm Principle. He argues for the Harm Principle based on freedom of speech. Basically, what I got out of it, he says that no matter how badly the speech may seem immoral, it should be allowed regardless. It might help to add that we learned that Mills is a libertarian. Overall, Mills thinks that the government should not coerce people in to not doing…

    • 423 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    John Stuart Mills believed very strongly in individual liberty and freedom. However I think that it is first important to state that Mills did not believe in unlimited liberty. He thought that this would lead to conflict, and therefore he believed that government was essential. He believed that the role of the government should be to protect citizens from such conflict, yet still allow for individual liberty and progress.…

    • 248 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mill vs Dworkin

    • 404 Words
    • 2 Pages

    "I forego any advantage which could be derived to my argument from the idea of abstract right as a thing independent of utility. I regard utility as the ultimate appeal on all ethical questions; but it must be utility in the largest sense, grounded on the permanent interests of man as a progressive being". Mill does not argue that liberty is a right but rather that giving people liberty has beneficial consequences. Mill thinks that paternalism does not serve the utilitarian purpose (to provide the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people) because the extent that “the most ordinary man or woman” knows about him or herself “immeasurably surpassing” anyone else. Any effort from the state to interfere, even from good intention, tends to lead to “evil” rather than good, since no one knows or cares more about his own interest than himself. As a result, “Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest”. The state should not interfere at all, except for when the act can harm others (Mill’s Harm Principle).…

    • 404 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The topic of freedom of speech has been debated for years. It was seen as incredibly important to our founding fathers as it earned its place in the First Amendment. The majority of Americans advocate for the preservation of this right, but some say it has gone too far. The people who say that freedom of speech should be limited argue that this liberty can lead to some uncomfortable situations. When people exercise their right of expression, some claim that it can be offensive. When people speak freely, they often test social boundaries set by years of cultural taboos.…

    • 999 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The first and most fundamental principle Mill holds is outlined in the introductory chapter and describes the necessity for man to be free over “Over himself, over his own body and mind” (Mill, 1859: 31). Individual liberty is not only considered personally fulfilling, but also beneficial to the progress of civilisation for “Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest” (Mill, 1859: 33). It is important to note that Mill does not endorse freedom of expression for its own sake but for the greater purpose of stimulating discourse “His argument for liberty of expression is in fact an argument for liberty of discussion” (Larvor, 2006: 3) To support his claims, he…

    • 1306 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Mill on Free Speech

    • 965 Words
    • 4 Pages

    In this essay I will attempt to elaborate on John Stuart Mill’s view on Free Speech while also discussing how the opposing side would argue his view on the topic. In this specific topic Mill addresses whether people should be allowed to persuade or limit anyone else’s expression of opinion. Mill argues that everyone should share the equal opportunity of free speech. He supports his theory with four arguments.…

    • 965 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    One of the most important writers of the Enlightenment was the philosopher and novelist Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). The work of Rousseau has influenced a generation and beyond and it is argued that the main ideals of the French and American revolutions arose from his works, for example The Discourse on Equality. The main concept of Rousseau's thought is that of 'liberty', and his belief that modern society forced humans to give up their independence, making everyday life corrupt and unfree. One of the central problems Rousseau confronted is best summed up in the first line of arguably his most important work, The Social Contract.…

    • 2083 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Mill vs. Rousseau

    • 1129 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Philosophers throughout the ages have had many well thought out and educated ideas and opinions about government and individuals place in society. Some are similar while others are conflicting, but all have a right to be analyzed to see which idea is the best in a situation. A qualifying example is the differences between Mill’s and Rousseau’s beliefs. Although, their ideas do appear to be similar in some ways, there are many distinguishing differences between them. Mill expresses his view of utilitarian in the book Utilitarianism, while Rousseau expresses his view of the Social Contract in the book The Social Contract. Each philosopher had their own idea of how a society is formed and governed. They also have their own opinion on what is an individual’s role in a community. Knowing this, it is most likely safe to assume they have different ideas on how it is justifiable if the federal government should or should not provide relief, in the form of funds to help individuals and local governments clean up and rebuild, to victims of natural disasters such as the recent Hurricane Sandy. Both have strong arguments for how their course of action is better, but it is Rousseau’s Social Contract view that makes the best case. Rousseau’s is best because his idea is the most likely to give aid to the victims in a dangerous situation, and most likely get it to them faster. His idea is also the more realistic scenario out of the two.…

    • 1129 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    As a matter a fact, Voltaire was the most influential philosopher within the revolution to challenge. Rousseau also influenced the third estate. Rousseau preached the equality of man, he later attacked justice "Men though born free are every where in chains", and even in the government he said. Rousseau according to A. Goodwin claimed that the only legitimate state was one that expressed the "General will" (the will of the people as a whole) which is inspired by good motives and directed only in the common interest. His contract social (social contract) of 1762 envisaged free men guaranteeing each other natural rights. Historians have concluded that Rousseau, inspired the people emotionally, preparing them to retaliate.…

    • 701 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Philosophers often attempt to design a societal system that reflects their view of "what is good." However, before this can be established, it is crucial for them to set out, in their opinion, their respective present view of society. In this case, what is commonly held as "good" is freedom. Rousseau 's explanation of social contracts affirms his belief in a common will that derives from his concept that if all individuals freely enter into a social contract based on the general will, this establishes authority in the political sovereign as long as it reflects such a will. This "general will" is contrasted with Mill 's notion of the liberty principle. The work of Mill "On Liberty" is fundamental to understanding the ways in which to liberate oneself from an oppressive society by way of promoting his harm principle, freedom of opinion and speech, and protection from the majority if one is indeed able to step back and observe the sovereign mechanism of society. While both philosophers offer valid arguments for legitimate functionality of…

    • 2053 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    freedom of expression

    • 561 Words
    • 3 Pages

    There should be limits to freedom of expression because we have to respect others. It is indeed undeniable that everyone has the right to speak what it is on their mind. However upon spewing out words on something the person must not offend others. And if it really necessary to do so, do it in the nicest way so the other party would not be offended but still the message is able to be delivered. In addition in doing whatever we think is our rights we should never forget that others have their rights to and we need to respect them. If you don’t like something it doesn’t mean that others must abandon it. Agree to disagree. The world is not only to be live alone but to live with others in the most harmonious way.…

    • 561 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays