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

  • Analysis Of Liz Garbus Shouting Fire

    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

  • Federalist Vs Anti Federalists Dbq Essay

    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

  • John Stuart Mill's Argumentative Essay

    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

  • Peaceful Protest Research Paper

    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

  • Controversy: The Role Of Satire In Modern Day America

    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

  • Should Justice Douglas Ban The Definition Of Obscenity?

    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

  • Comparing Mill And Kant's Theories

    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

  • Why Should Maus Not Be Banned

    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

  • Pros And Cons Of The First Amendment Essay

    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

  • First Amendment Limitations

    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

  • Argumentative Essay: The First Amendment

    1228 Words  | 5 Pages

    The First Amendment outlines free speech as the right to speak, write, and share ideas and opinions without facing punishment from the government. Without the Constitution, Americans wouldn’t have basic rights and their actions and decisions would be controlled, stressing the importance of free speech. Therefore, the limitations on free speech should be no more than that said in the First Amendment as further restrictions would eliminate the foundations of human rights and freedoms in a democracy, lower one’s knowledge of their individualism, and would ultimately suppress a peaceful society. Free speech may be discussed in a multitude of ways, both positive and negative. However, the idea of limiting such freedoms is either or.

    Read More

  • We Are Free To Be You Me Stupid And Dead Summary

    596 Words  | 3 Pages

    We don’t have freedom of expression because of microagression which limits on what can be said. Rosenblatt makes another point when he states “Freedom is like a legal drug. How far will it go?” (Rosenblatt p.216). This is saying that freedom of expression may be permitted but is not expressed.

    Read More

  • What Is Chapter 1 P5 Of The Counter-Terrorism And Security Act 2015

    4364 Words  | 18 Pages

    The broadcasting ban was an infringement of the right to freedom of expression but it was a limited interference, as the words, if not the voices of the members of the listed organisations could still be heard. It has been argued that the real problem lay in the effect the ban had in further stifling debate over the Troubles. The encouragement offence was problematic as the ambiguity surrounding the definition of terrorism and ‘encouragement’, meant that it was very wide in scope and was applied subjectively. It restricted political speech considerably since it criminalized speech that ‘glorified’ acts of violence against any government, no matter how oppressive or racist. However, the latest incursion on free speech, in the form of C1.P5 really does constitute a new departure.

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill's View On Freedom: A Definition Of Freedom

    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

  • Advantages Of Freedom Of Speech

    2363 Words  | 10 Pages

    1.0 INTRODUCTION In the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), freedom of speech falls under the Article 19 which is the freedom of opinion and expression. It protects one’s freedom ‘to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers’ (The United Nations, 1948). Article 19(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) adds that the freedom of expression could be ‘either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice’. Besides being an individual’s fundamental liberty of expression, Santa Clara University School of Law Professor Russell W. Galloway (1991) states that free speech is the ‘matrix of all other freedoms’.

    Read More

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

Open Document