• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

What are Mill’s four main arguments in defence of freedom of speech?

Extracts from this document...


What are Mill's four main arguments in defence of freedom of speech? Which, in your opinion, is the weakest argument? Explain what objections might be raised to this argument, and consider what responses (if any) might be raised to these objections on behalf of Mill. In defending freedom of speech and ideas from suppression and censorship, subject to the Harm Principle, Mill laid down four arguments to show that such suppression was contrary to the good of 'the human race, posterity as well as the existing generation', both to those who are suppressed and more acutely the suppresser. The arguments are as follows; firstly the idea might be true. To assume otherwise is to assume infallibility. Secondly, though the idea might be wrong, it may contain some truth missing from the orthodox view and thus by being openly discussed and refuted the true element may be isolated and incorporated into the larger truth. Thirdly, even if the established truth is the whole truth, it must be criticised and challenged or it will become a received opinion, held without rational argument. Finally, Mill argues, if orthodox opinion goes unchallenged it stands in danger of losing its power and becoming something professed, but not deeply believed. ...read more.


Irvine has written a number of books and articles attempting to recast Adolph Hitler as a great war leader and denying the systematic attempted extermination of the Jewish race. Mill would allow this under the Harm Principle as long as there was no accompanying incitement to violence and because no matter how firmly and with what evidence an opinion is held, challenges must be allowed. Many authors and historians have published work attempting to discredit Irvine's methodology and conclusions and indeed Irvine sued and threatened to sue the authors and publishers for libel. Thus in court Irvine's arguments and those of his opponents were publicly and dispassionately analysed and Irvine was found to be wanting in all cases. In this way, as Mill showed, the truth, in this case the history of the Holocaust was reaffirmed and kept alive rather than becoming a dry historical fact. Mill's fourth argument is closely linked to the above 'Dead Dogma' argument. He holds that unless a belief is challenged and examined it ends up losing its power to motivate its believers. Mill's example is the commandments and moral lessons of the Bible to which lip-service was paid, in his opinion, in Victorian England. ...read more.


If we look to either Christianity in Communist Russia or Falon Gong in modern China we can see clearly that, given the correct circumstances, religious belief can thrive under conditions of oppression. As to the problem of anecdotal evidence, there is not much answer other than to point to the wide range of other sources for similar evidence. One might take the work of Dickens as a social commentator of his time, or the necessity for child labour legislation to show that Mill was not the only person to recognise and comment on the problems and their causes of his time. In response to the objections as a whole it might be argued that rather than making a specific point about Victorian Christianity Mill was making a general point and using the opportunity to level a damaging accusation at a group he felt strongly about even though in dong so he weakened his own argument. Therefore, in my opinion, the 'link with action' argument is the weakest of the four. It can be objected to on the grounds of being simplistic and not allowing for other influences, that it is based on a single example and that that example is based on anecdotal evidence. These can be responded to by allowing for those other influences, providing further examples and pointing out a range of other sources of similar anecdotal evidence. 1 of 7 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Philosophy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Philosophy essays

  1. Compare, contrast and evaluate Plato and Mill on the relationship between individual and society

    Mill encouraged the equal rights for women on the basis of utility. He argued that we could not criticise women for being less skilled than men if we did not give them equal opportunity to try. He also said that society could not be at its best when half the population could contribute nothing to society outside of the home.

  2. Compare and contrast arguments for and against belief in life after death.

    He also states that he can say that he is essentially a thinking thing. Therefore this perception of the physical seems to imply that there is something else apart from the body with regard to being a human.5 However in this case it is possible to argue that appearance may

  1. We do not possess any genuine freedom to act ethically Discuss

    old and lived in a deprived area of Newcastle with her single mother. Mary at the age of 10 murdered two children, the two and three year old sons of a neighbour. Referring back to what was afore mentioned about the age in which a child knows the difference between

  2. "Liberalism puts too much emphasis on freedom at the expense of other values." Discuss

    the laissez-faire sense, actually comes at the expense of real freedom itself. Because classical liberalism sees freedom only in the negative sense, i.e. in freedom from constraints on one's natural rights (by the state or others), it does not acknowledge that those born into poverty, for example, are born into

  1. Compare and Contrast the Philisophical Contributions of Nietzsche and Mill to our understanding of ...

    Hence Mill argued that public opinion should not be a law that everyone should conform to, and that the individual should have protection of the law against the prevailing sentiments of society. - Essentially, we each need freedom to develop our individuality.

  2. Plato and Nietzsche on Authority

    However, he wouldn't necessarily say that this was a bad thing, as if slaves are happy being slaves, then they have less of the Will to Power and therefore do (in a sense) know what's good for themselves personally. Of course, even if we convert Plato's theory on Authority to

  1. Outline and assess the main objections to representative realism

    how it gets hungry between one meal and the next; but if it does not exist when I am not seeing it, it seems odd that appetite should grow during non-existence as fast as during existence.

  2. To be is to be perceived Discuss

    Instead he argued that what we experience when we experience qualities, either primary or secondary, are ideas; and ideas only exist in the mind. It doesn?t make sense to say a pain exists unless someone feels it, or that a colour exists unless someone sees it.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work