ipl-logo

The Harm Principle And Free Speech In John Stuart Mill's On Liberty

1236 Words5 Pages

After the shootings at Charlie Hebdo, there was tremendous sympathy for the victims. However the debate over whether there are any limits to free speech continues, and this is what I will argue throughout this essay. The question I pose; are there any cases when expression should be limited? Looking at John Stuart Mill’s twofold argument on the topic we get an insight into his theory of ‘The Harm Principle and Free Speech’ in On Liberty (Mill, 1859). In chapter one of Mill’s book “On Liberty” published 1859, he observes that freedom can be split into three types. Firstly, he mentions the liberty of thought and opinion. The second type is the liberty of tastes and pursuits and the freedom we have to plan our own lives. Thirdly, there is the liberty to strive for a common purpose with other like-minded people without harming anyone. According to Mill each type “must be recognized and respected by any free society.” (Mill, 1859) Looking at Mill’s concept of the liberty of thought and opinion, we reflect on the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack. It was an act of violence in response to what Mill would consider freedom of opinion and thought. This links back to my original question; should expression be limited in certain circumstances? According to Mill each individual should be …show more content…

We understand the satire that was published was prejudiced and slightly racist, towards the Muslim community. Should this qualify as an opportunity for society to step in according to Mill? I feel if Mill were to voice his opinion today, it would indeed qualify for the interjection of society as the satire did affect prejudicially the interests of certain parts of the Muslim

Show More
Related
1529 Words | 7 Pages

By the freedom of opinion, cannot be meant the right of thinking merely; for of this right the greatest Tyrant cannot deprive his meanest slave; but it is freedom in the communication of sentiments [by] speech or through the press” (Voices of Freedom, Chapter

Read More
217 Words | 1 Pages

From Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. quoted “The most stringent of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic”. The meaning of

Read More
1224 Words | 5 Pages

Whether it is at the dinner table or in my family’s group text message, the conversation about my brother’s custody battle with my mother’s side of the family seems to remain a bitter topic, especially when discussing my role in it. When my father physically harmed my brother to the extent to which he had to go to the emergency room, the custody trial over my brother and me began. After several sources provided the judge with accusations against my father, I was the final source that needed to assert or deny my father’s abuse; with heavy consideration, I decided to lie to the judge by denying my father’s abuse. Under the principle of utilitarianism, philosophers would infer that lying is permissible if the consequences of doing so are good.

Read More
1483 Words | 6 Pages

The freedoms of speech and of press are quintessential American rights, afford to it’s citizens through the ratification of the first amendment on December 15, 1791. These rights protect the voices of minority's, inform citizens, preserve the truth and create a watchdog for government corruption. Although these rights are toted in high esteem by most Americans, most are unaware these freedoms are not absolute and poses limitations. Such limitations sometimes include speech that criticizes the government. Throughout American history freedom of expression seem to be treated

Read More
919 Words | 4 Pages

In colonial America, the common law of criminal libel was equally separated against the selfish colonists, making the “open” discussion of public issues hazardous, if not impossible, except when colonists opposed the government (Levy). With the end of the Sedition Act  the federal government was strengthened. This was not the case, however, with local and state governments seeking to eliminate political criticism. There was very high tension in the Colonial era. The government strengthening didn’t necessarily mean the end or the beginning for the freedom of press and the first Amendment.

Read More
661 Words | 3 Pages

In the story we are only mentioned about Gregor’s metamorphosis and no one else really. But if you read the story closely, you start to realize that another character is also going through their own metamorphosis and that person is Gregor little sister, Grete. Grete metamorphosis is a little different from Gregor, mainly since he becomes into a giant insect, because she turns from a child into a very well presented adult. This is mentioned near the end of the story when her parents say that she has become into a fine young woman. This discussion will be a comparison of the two sibling’s metamorphosis on how they are alike and different.

Read More
558 Words | 3 Pages

However, the government in both state and federal levels has been seeking a way to modify this amendment. In the decades following the Second World War, the federal government began restricting the right to express opinion publicly in a socialist or communist perspective, going as far as to imprison those who believe in these perspectives. This infringes the right of citizens of the United States, however, this infringement was done to “ensure” the safety of every citizen at the time. These actions committed by the government, however, does not prove that peaceful protest is bad, but instead, proves how effective it can be.

Read More
557 Words | 3 Pages

For example, books like Harry Potter get banned because of religious reasons but we should be able to talk about controversial topics because we have freedom of speech, and if we were given the right we should be able to express our feelings and ideas. For example, in Passage 2 it says ¨banning books can also have the unintended consequence of restricting access to critical information.¨ Banning Maus will go against freedom of

Read More
261 Words | 2 Pages

It is not rational to allow governments to ban certain expressions because they are not appealing to some people. If such an act is allowed, than freedom of speech and press guaranteed by the 1st Amendment becomes useless, and that every material could be banned based on this test. People cannot be punished for expressing their views just because those views might not be appealing to some judge or jury (O`Brien, 508).

Read More
630 Words | 3 Pages

Satire can have many serious repercussions, including public backlash. Though satire can come off offensive, it is paramount to not censor who we are as people. Many comedies have and can cross the line of what people find acceptable in modern day America. Albeit our constitution guarantees the right to liberation of speech, it is often challenged by the public who find some satirical comedy to be morally disputable. As our society grows, so does our consciousness on what is politically correct and falls under our moral values.

Read More
925 Words | 4 Pages

Liz Garbus's, Shouting Fire: Stories from the Edge of Free Speech\ explores the political as well as the social context of American's freedom of speech in the post 9/11 era. While watching Garbus's documentary, one can predict that how freedom of speech, as a part of The First Amendment, is violated after the 9/11 era, for “security” reasons. The documentary begins with Ward Churchill, a political activist, author and professor of ethnic studies at the University of Colorado. He exposed the hidden facts of endangered freedom of speech in America. He had to face harsh circumstances for using his right of speech and ultimately in 2005, he eventually got fired from the University of Colorado because of his unethical views about the foreign

Read More
714 Words | 3 Pages

Mill and Kant have opposite idea and they support different moral philosophies. Mill exactly suppose the idea of social thinking, namely he claims that everyone attach an importance to other human beings. However, Kant considers that selfishness reflect people’s characteristics, in other words, each person should pay attention to themselves not others, because the most important thing for them is themselves. Kant also highlight that people can only behave in a good manner, if they have good will. In other words, Kant attach an importance to people’s instinct or characteristics, Mill gives weight to promoting happiness and dissolution of the pain.

Read More
1055 Words | 5 Pages

In a democracy, freedom of speech and the press must be accorded great respect, but other values such as national security, the protection of reputation or public safety sometimes conflict with First Amendment guarantees. Discuss the approaches that have been used by the Supreme Court to define the limits on expression. How have these approaches been applied in specific cases? Several restrictions have been formulated on expression.

Read More
928 Words | 4 Pages

Ethics Case Study 1 Genetic information is found in each part of our cell. Chromosomes contain many genes, a section of DNA. These genes have a coding system using adenine, thymine, cytosine, and guanine, which are strung together in a long chain to create a unique DNA sequence. Different genes control the development of special characteristics of an organism.

Read More
1119 Words | 5 Pages

If you compare the two you can see that even though they aren’t the same, in the context of theory, it gets the same meaning, as being free from oppression imposed by authority, is liberty, having liberty is being free from oppression, and therefor, throughout the paper, the world will be used as having the same meaning as different theorist use different words. John Stuart Mill is a “British philosopher, economist, moral and political theorist, and administrator, was the most influential English-speaking philosopher of the nineteenth century” (Wilson). He’s known Another person is Philip Petit, who argues for republican freedom, which is different from libertarian freedom that Mill argues for. While Mill focuses freedom on individually and state, Petit argues that pure freedom is not being controlled by anything. Comparing those two gives the conclusion

Read More

More about The Harm Principle And Free Speech In John Stuart Mill's On Liberty

Related Topics

Open Document