Disobedient Discourse: Mill, ContraPoints, and the Limits of Free Speech Norms
Field | Value | Language |
dc.contributor.author | Anderson, Lachlan | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-02-01T22:47:50Z | |
dc.date.available | 2024-02-01T22:47:50Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2024-02-02 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2123/32169 | |
dc.description.abstract | In this paper, I explore contemporary disagreement regarding protests against speakers deemed regressive or bigoted by progressive activists. I do so by examining the rationale, scope, and operation of free speech norms (i.e. non-legal standards that require people to respond to speech with tolerance). I specifically focus on the free speech norms defended by John Stuart Mill in his essay ‘On Liberty’. I contend that Mill’s free speech norms are well-justified and extend to protect the speech of regressive bigots in almost all circumstances. However, I also draw upon two arguments from Natalie Wynn’s video essay ‘The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling’ to contend that Millian free speech norms present serious problems for marginalised people. I attempt to resolve this tension between Mill’s well-justified norms and their problematic implications for marginalised people by developing a concept of ‘disobedient discourse’ that is modelled after John Rawls’ account of civil disobedience and allows for free speech norms to be violated in circumstances of longstanding injustice. | en_AU |
dc.language.iso | en | en_AU |
dc.subject | Free Speech | en_AU |
dc.subject | Mill | en_AU |
dc.subject | Protests | en_AU |
dc.subject | Liberalism | en_AU |
dc.title | Disobedient Discourse: Mill, ContraPoints, and the Limits of Free Speech Norms | en_AU |
dc.type | Thesis | en_AU |
dc.type.thesis | Honours | en_AU |
usyd.faculty | SeS faculties schools::Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences::School of Humanities | en_AU |
usyd.department | Department of Philosophy | en_AU |
workflow.metadata.only | No | en_AU |
Associated file/s
Associated collections