Name:
Student Number:
Course Name:
Professor Name:
Date:
Deconstruction of Online Realities: Why They Censored and Western Philosophy of Ethics in Regards to Freedom of Expression This essay will thoroughly discuss the censorship and fundamental rights to Canadian and American Freedom of Speech. Ethics is philosophy. The Greek philosopher Pluto whose discussion was of image and reality and the way his standpoint was related into triggering the long-running dispute between those who champion sense experience (called empiricists) or perception that in their view that provides to them with an immediate and measurable grasp of reality versus those who uphold reason rather than the senses as the source of truth (called idealists). Since our sense can easily mislead us, we should, according to the idealists, strive to form ideas, abstracted from the particularity and changeability of any grasp of reality by our senses. The idealists thus emphasize that truth can only be attained by reason (Ruggiero, Plato and Theory of Forms, 2002). That is why the reason of exploring the online reality and fundamental human rights of speech are important to explore. The story of Reno versus ACLU tells us about Janet Reno American attorney general (1993-2001) in the United States, who was in the position of American Civil Liberty Union where an independent organization dedicated to preserve and extend the basic rights of the U.S. constitution. The Supreme Court decided that the
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear” (George Orwell). Whether the opinion is of extreme offense or not, censorship is not the answer nor is the limitation of the freedom of speech. Emerging the truth, can only be possible through the opposition of ideas, thus with no boundries, the full protection of freedom of speech is a necessary quality of any society.
Most who argue against censorship believe that it goes against a person’s right to freedom of speech. Within this argument, most people wonder “just when, and on what grounds, the state is justified in using its coercive powers to limit the freedom of individuals” (West). When thinking in this mindset, individuals tend to antagonize the government, because they come to believe that it suppresses their individuality and fail to consider the fact that it unites people who share its similar beliefs. As a result of the recent spike in technology and use of the Internet, the public must continually alter its definition of freedom of speech and expression. As the media offers more and more methods of communication, many of which are relatively self-regulated by users, more methods of expression develop, which may render other forms of expression obsolete, or even socially unacceptable (Qazi). Without understanding how much freedom of speech one is entitled to, one may never hope to defend that freedom if it ever comes under attack. Because technology develops so quickly that one definition will hardly suffice for a short period of time, people will find it increasingly difficult to understand how much right to expression they are allowed and will therefore fight for any and all that they may attain, never considering the benefits of censorship in the slightest. In America especially, people idealize the idea of democracy, the investigation of truth, and independence (Fieser). In
This guarantees every individual the freedom to write and read what they choose. Yet in the past twenty years, thousands of books have been challenged in almost every state. This censorship is against the American ideals of individual freedom. While most censors intend to “protect” others from things they consider objectionable (Time, p.85), they are still taking away the rights of others to choose for themselves.
In the United States of America, the First Amendment of the Constitution assures individuals such civil liberties as the freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and petition. Freedom of speech preserves not only an individual’s right to vocally express themselves unabridged, it also allows them the right to burn the American flag, engage in silent protest, and more recently (2016), get a tattoo. In some respects, freedom of speech has come to mean the freedom of communication.
America’s first president George Washington once argued at the [whenever he said this] that “If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.” It is an essential component to the daily life of any constitutional republic, such as that of the United States even though it is a right granted to all American citizens, in the past, freedom of speech has been abridged to accommodate political correctness, to prevent disruptive behavior that could negatively affect others, and to protect confidential military information.
One hears about censorship of free word happening all the time in other countries, but did it ever happen in the United States of America? Not many people know that restriction of free speech and personal expression did in fact occur in America, mainly during the 1950s. During this tumultuous time, newfound fears of threatening outside influences, mainly political in nature, had set in and as a result the government tried to protect the American public from these “radical” ideas through the use of censorship, or a restriction in the flow of information or ideas. Working feverishly to control what they deemed inappropriate, they launched multiple programs to combat these influences. Unfortunately, the government’s reasonably good intentions
Censorship within the United States is not only an immoral and "big-brotherly" practice, but also an insult to each and every one of those who call themselves US citizens. Every day, censors attempt to sanitize TV, radio, music, print, and even the Internet. In their infinite wisdom, they deem what should and should not be viewed by John Q. Public. Censors succeed in suppressing our free spirits and restraining our thoughts in virtually every medium.
In the article, “The Hell You Say” by Kelefa Sanneh, conveys the modern day struggles of censorship and First Amendment, and in the article, “The Coddling of the American Mind” by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, portray that American universities students have become victims due to censorship. In the first article, Sanneh focuses on the American system and whether something is free speech and have society gone to far with political correctness. Sanneh expresses that free speech in American has become “muffled by soft censorship” (Sanneh #). The author is saying that free speech is not completely ‘free’ and that censorship has taken place for years in America.
Centuries ago in American society, individuals were not granted the free will to act and speak freely. First Amendment rights allowed citizens to do so. On a historical outlook, the oppressed fought for the rights of various groups in the United States. Although laws and situations evolve, groups in America continue to face inequality and issues with freedom of speech. There is room for further improvement; freedom for all citizens needs to be fulfilled. The impression of being free is what gives the United States the ideology of being a part of a democracy. Recent events have revealed issues with freedom of speech and questioning about what kinds of speech is protected. In order to close the gap in
Our nation has entered a period where it is becoming increasingly more acceptable to allow censorship for the sake of people’s feelings. This new idea that nothing should be said to cause offense, or distress, to another person is becoming as widespread as to even enter the classrooms of some universities, which now limit what can be discussed (Lukianoff and Haidt, 1). These hypersensitive Americans are beginning to flood into our nation with the belief that we should all care about how people feel about a certain topic. However, the fortunate truth is that we do not and will never care about anyone else’s sensitivity to a topic so much that we limit how express ourselves. The American constitution purposely gives Americans the freedom of speech and expression so that we may cause offense to other people, for the sake of having everyone’s opinions voiced.
Writer Mark Shaver wrote an article titled “Does Disruption Violate Free Speech?” in which he summarized a book written by Howard Gillman, chancellor, and a professor of law and political science at the University of California and Erwin Chemerinsky dean and professor at the
Freedom of expression is a right given to fuel people’s imaginative minds that are occupied with different thoughts and opinions. Censorship is only an obstacle, preventing people from expressing their inner beliefs by replacing it with fake ones. Censorship actively prohibits and suppresses people’s opinions to speak up in society freely and openly. It restricts the common adult or child of any gender from being themselves and fighting for what they believe in. Censoring speech and expression only establish greater problems than the one attempting to be resolved that both prevent people from expressing themselves and cover the ears of those who are willing to listen.
Frequent topics of debate in our country pertain to our rights according to the constitution. Namely, freedom of speech and expression is often cause for controversy.
Censorship impacts how many people live their lives and what they are allowed to witness; Geoffrey R. Stone and Will Creeley write about the freedom of expression and the abolishment of censorship for college students and universities in “Resorting Free Speech on Campus.” Stone and Creeley effectively use a personal observation, a quote from a prominent individual, the bias technique, and irony in order to convince readers to take their side and agree to abort censorship for college students.
The civil liberties that the American people have are inalienable rights. The most important of these is the freedom of speech. Yet freedom of speech is not entirely protected; using hurtful, false, or damaging speech is not allowed. But how can the American government control something as basic as speech? There are laws against libel and slander but how are they perpetrated? This essay will explain how the court cases and laws have evolved and been clarified throughout America’s history up to present day.