This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories

137 found
Order:
1 — 50 / 137
  1. added 2020-09-09
    Harm, "No Platforming" and the Mission of the University: A Reply to McGregor.Lisa L. Fuller - 2020 - In Democracy, Populism and Truth. AMINTAPHIL: The Philosophical Foundations of Law and Justice 9. Jersey City, NJ, USA: pp. 91-101.
    Joan McGregor argues that “colleges and universities should adopt as part of their core mission the development of skills of civil discourse” rather than engaging in the practice of restricting controversial speakers from making presentations on campuses. I agree with McGregor concerning the need for increased civil discourse. However, this does not mean universities should welcome speakers to publicly present any material they wish without restriction or oversight. In this paper, I make three main arguments: (i) Colleges and universities have (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. added 2020-08-17
    Kant’s Fourth Defense of Freedom of Expression.Michael Davis - 1983 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 21 (1):13-29.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. added 2020-07-11
    The Right to Press Freedom of Expression Vs the Rights of Marginalised Groups: An Answer Grounded in Personhood Rights.Leonie Smith - 2020 - In Rachael Mellin and Raimo Tuomela Miguel Garcia-Godinez (ed.), Social Ontology, Normativity and Law. Berlin, Germany: pp. 79-96.
    Opponents and proponents alike of the freedom of the UK press to print prejudicial content about marginalised groups typically frame the debate in classic ‘free speech’ vs ‘harm principle’ terms. Those in favour of press freedom argue that the print press' right to freedom of expression beats any perceived or actual harm caused, and those against argue the opposite. Predictably, little progress is made in either party convincing the other. I suggest that we ought to instead ask, what grounds the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. added 2020-07-10
    From despotism to constitutionalism: Building constitutional order in Russia.Andrej Poleev - manuscript
    The historical roots of despotism in Russia are long, the tradition of arbitrariness seems to be unbreakable. But this status quo can't persist endless: Growing mass protests indicate that the time nears when Russia will unhorse the self-constituted disposers and will demonstrate again its re-invention potential. -/- This expected and hoped egression from despotism into a new phase of Russian history needs to be carefully elaborated and arranged. Starting with the writing and publishing of my essays following mass political protests (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. added 2020-06-30
    Silencing and Freedom of Speech in UK Higher Education.Finlay Malcolm - forthcoming - British Educational Research Journal.
    Freedom of speech in universities is currently an issue of widespread concern and debate. Recent empirical findings in the UK shed some light on whether speech is unduly restricted in the university, but it suffers from two limitations. First, the results appear contradictory. Some studies show that the issue of free speech is overblown by media reportage, whilst others track serious concerns about free speech arising from certain university policies. Second, the findings exclude important issues concerning restrictions to speech on (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. added 2020-06-29
    Moral Grandstanding as a Threat to Free Expression.Justin Tosi & Brandon Warmke - forthcoming - Social Philosophy and Policy 37 (1).
    Moral grandstanding, or the use of moral talk for self-promotion, is a threat to free expression. When grandstanding is introduced in a public forum, several ideals of free expression are less likely to be realized. Popular views are less likely to be challenged, people are less free to entertain heterodox ideas, and the cost of changing one’s mind goes up.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. added 2020-06-12
    Dekonstruktion der Neutralität. Subjektive Rechte und Politik am Beispiel des „Kopftuchstreits“.Markus Wolf - 2017 - Rechtsphilosophie. Zeitschrift Für Grundlagen des Rechts 3 (2):171-189.
    Der Aufsatz beschäftigt sich am Beispiel des deutschen "Kopftuchstreits" mit der rechtlich-politischen Auseinandersetzung um subjektive Rechte innerhalb des liberalen Rechtsstaats. Wie Christoph Menke in seiner Deutung der für den politischen Liberalismus wesentlichen politischen Konflikte gezeigt hat, bezieht sich diese Auseinandersetzung vorrangig auf zwei Fragen: Wer sollte Anspruch darauf genießen, ein politisches Subjekt zu sein, das heißt, als Gleiche oder Gleicher berücksichtigt zu werden? Welche Ansprüche politischer Subjekte könneen als schützenswerte Verwirklichung subjektiver Rechte gelten? Der vorliegende Beitrag beschäftigt sich vorwiegend mit (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8. added 2020-05-20
    Mill’s Defense of Free Expression: Its Contemporary Significance.Filimon Peonidis - 2002 - Journal of Social Philosophy 33 (4):606-613.
  9. added 2020-05-19
    Civil Rights and Hate Crimes Legislation: Two Important Asymmetries.Arthur R. Miller - 2003 - Journal of Social Philosophy 34 (3):437-443.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. added 2020-05-18
    What Should and Should Not Be Said: Deliberating Sensitive Issues.Mark E. Warren - 2006 - Journal of Social Philosophy 37 (2):163-181.
  11. added 2020-05-16
    Self-Respect and Public Reason.Gregory Whitfield - 2017 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 20 (6):677-696.
  12. added 2020-05-16
    Free Speech as a Special Right.Leslie Kendrick - 2017 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 45 (2):87-117.
  13. added 2020-05-15
    Inducing Democracy in the Age of Eric Garner.Jennifer Rubenstein - 2016 - Philosophy and Public Issues - Filosofia E Questioni Pubbliche.
  14. added 2020-05-15
    Confucian Reflective Commitment and Free Expression.David Elstein - 2016 - European Journal of Political Theory 19 (3):314-333.
    As Confucian political thought is adapted to modern circumstances, the question of free expression merits more attention. Most contemporary Confucian political theorists accept a right to political...
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. added 2020-05-07
    Rights as weapons: Instruments of conflict, tools of power.Nicola Perugini - forthcoming - Contemporary Political Theory:1-4.
  16. added 2020-05-07
    Harassment, Bias, and the Evolving Politics of Free Speech on Campus.Ann E. Cudd - 2019 - Journal of Social Philosophy 50 (4):425-446.
  17. added 2020-05-06
    Conspiracy Theories and Reasonable Pluralism.Matej Cíbik & Pavol Hardoš - forthcoming - European Journal of Political Theory:147488511989923.
    The popularity of conspiracy theories poses a clear challenge for contemporary liberal democracies. Conspiracy theories undermine rational debate, spread dangerous falsehoods and threaten social cohesion. However, any possible public policy response, which would try to contain their spread, needs to respect the liberal commitment to protect pluralism and free speech. A successful justification of such a policy must therefore: 1) clearly identify the problematic class of conspiracy theories; and 2) clarify the grounds on which the state is justified in acting (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. added 2020-04-26
    An Ecological Theory of Free Expression.Gary Chartier - 2018 - Springer Verlag.
    This book develops an account of freedom of expression rooted in a broader understanding of human flourishing. It is intended to highlight reasons for not only political institutions but also noncoercive social institutions—employers, churches, clubs—to value and safeguard expressive freedom. It emphasizes a set of overlapping and mutually reinforcing considerations supportive of this kind of freedom, including property rights, class-analytic and public-choice-theoretic understandings of state and institutional decision-making, the limits on the capacity of expressive activity to injure or cause injury, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. added 2020-03-20
    Search Engines, Free Speech Coverage, and the Limits of Analogical Reasoning.Heather Whitney & Robert Mark Simpson - 2019 - In Susan Brison & Katharine Gelber (eds.), Free Speech in the Digital Age. pp. 33-41.
    This paper investigates whether search engines and other new modes of online communication should be covered by free speech principles. It criticizes the analogical reason-ing that contemporary American courts and scholars have used to liken search engines to newspapers, and to extend free speech coverage to them based on that likeness. There are dissimilarities between search engines and newspapers that undermine the key analogy, and also rival analogies that can be drawn which don’t recommend free speech protection for search engines. (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20. added 2020-03-09
    The Relation Between Academic Freedom and Free Speech.Robert Mark Simpson - 2020 - Ethics 130 (3):287-319.
    The standard view of academic freedom and free speech is that they play complementary roles in universities. Academic freedom protects academic discourse, while other public discourse in universities is protected by free speech. Here I challenge this view, broadly, on the grounds that free speech in universities sometimes undermines academic practices. One defense of the standard view, in the face of this worry, says that campus free speech actually furthers the university’s academic aims. Another says that universities have a secondary (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. added 2020-03-04
    Regulating Offense, Nurturing Offense.Robert Mark Simpson - 2018 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 17 (3):235-256.
    Joel Feinberg’s Offense to Others is the most comprehensive contemporary work on the significance of offense in a liberal legal system. Feinberg argues that being offended can impair a person’s liberty, much like a nuisance, and that it is therefore legitimate in principle to regulate conduct because of its offensiveness. In this article, I discuss some overlooked considerations that give us reason to resist Feinberg’s conclusion, even while granting this premise. My key claim is that the regulation of offense can (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22. added 2020-02-14
    Pirates of the Information Infrastructure: Blackstonian Copyright and the First Amendment.Hannibal Travis - 2000 - Berkeley Technology Law Journal 15:777.
  23. added 2020-02-11
    Liberalism Divided: Freedom of Speech and the Many Uses of State Power.Robert Justin Lipkin - 1997 - Ethics 107 (4):737-740.
  24. added 2019-12-06
    “Offensiphobia” is a Red Herring: On the Problem of Censorship and Academic Freedom.Ben Cross & Louise Richardson-Self - 2020 - Journal of Ethics 24 (1):31-54.
    In a recent article, J. Angelo Corlett criticises what he takes to be the ‘offensiphobic’ practices characteristic of many universities. The ‘offensiphobe’, according to Corlett, believes that offensive speech ought to be censured precisely because it offends. We argue that there are three serious problems with Corlett’s discussion. First, his criticism of ‘offensiphobia’ misrepresents the kinds of censorship practiced by universities; many universities may in some way censure speech which they regard as offensive, but this is seldom if ever a (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  25. added 2019-11-25
    ‘Won’T Somebody Please Think of the Children?’ Hate Speech, Harm, and Childhood.Robert Simpson - 2019 - Law and Philosophy 38 (1):79-108.
    Some authors claim that hate speech plays a key role in perpetuating unjust social hierarchy. One prima facie plausible hypothesis about how this occurs is that hate speech has a pernicious influence on the attitudes of children. Here I argue that this hypothesis has an important part to play in the formulation of an especially robust case for general legal prohibitions on hate speech. If our account of the mechanism via which hate speech effects its harms is built around claims (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26. added 2019-10-04
    No Platforming.Robert Mark Simpson & Amia Srinivasan - 2018 - In Jennifer Lackey (ed.), Academic Freedom. Oxford, UK: pp. 186-209.
    This paper explains how the practice of ‘no platforming’ can be reconciled with a liberal politics. While opponents say that no platforming flouts ideals of open public discourse, and defenders see it as a justifiable harm-prevention measure, both sides mistakenly treat the debate like a run-of-the-mill free speech conflict, rather than an issue of academic freedom specifically. Content-based restrictions on speech in universities are ubiquitous. And this is no affront to a liberal conception of academic freedom, whose purpose isn’t just (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  27. added 2019-09-28
    The Limits of the Rights to Free Thought and Expression.Barrett Emerick - forthcoming - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal.
    It is often held that people have a moral right to believe and say whatever they want. For instance, one might claim that they have a right to believe racist things as long as they keep those thoughts to themselves. Or, one might claim that they have a right to pursue any philosophical question they want as long as they do so with a civil tone. In this paper I object to those claims and argue that no one has such (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  28. added 2019-09-25
    A Free and Regulated Press.Paul Wragg - forthcoming - Oxford, UK: Hart.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  29. added 2019-09-25
    Recognising a Privacy-Invasion Tort: The Conceptual Unity of Informational and Intrusion Claims.Paul Wragg - 2019 - Cambridge Law Journal 78 (2):409-437.
    This article presents the novel view that ‘inclusion into seclusion’ and ‘public disclosure of embarrassing facts’ (‘misuse of private information’ (“MOPI”) in the UK), which both the academic commentary and US case law treat as two separate legal actions, occupy the same conceptual space. This claim has important practical ramifications. No further development of the law is required to realise an actionable intrusion tort as part of the UK’s MOPI tort. The argument is defended in doctrinal and theoretical terms, and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. added 2019-09-25
    Protecting Private Information of Public Interest: Campbell's Great Promise Unfulfilled.Paul Wragg - 2016 - Journal of Media Law 7 (2):225-250.
    According to the House of Lords decision in Campbell v MGN Ltd, a misuse of private information claim may succeed even though public interest expression is at stake. The post-Campbell jurisprudence, however, does not reflect this central tenet. Cases are not determined by balancing the weight of each claim but by a binary approach in which claims succeed or fail depending on whether public interest expression is present or not. By charting this development, this article argues that a greater sense (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  31. added 2019-09-25
    Free Speech Rights at Work: Resolving the Differences Between Practice and Liberal Principle.Paul Wragg - 2015 - Industrial Law Journal 44 (1):1-28.
    ACAS reports increasing disciplinary action against employees over expression that employers dislike. Given the prominence of social media in contemporary life, this is a significant current legal issue yet one which has attracted relatively little academic comment. This article examines the compatibility of unfair dismissal doctrine in this context with traditional liberal principle. Arguably, doctrine provides only flimsy protection. Although the common law recognises the importance of individual autonomy generally when determining rights claims, this well-established liberal value appears to have (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  32. added 2019-09-09
    Online Masquerade: Redesigning the Internet for Free Speech Through the Use of Pseudonyms.Carissa Véliz - 2019 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 36 (4):643-658.
    Anonymity promotes free speech by protecting the identity of people who might otherwise face negative consequences for expressing their ideas. Wrongdoers, however, often abuse this invisibility cloak. Defenders of anonymity online emphasise its value in advancing public debate and safeguarding political dissension. Critics emphasise the need for identifiability in order to achieve accountability for wrongdoers such as trolls. The problematic tension between anonymity and identifiability online lies in the desirability of having low costs (no repercussions) for desirable speech and high (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  33. added 2019-09-05
    Texting, Suicide, and the Law: The Case Against Punishing Michelle Carter.Mark Tunick - 2019 - London and New York: Routledge.
    Through a series of texts and phone calls, Michelle Carter encouraged her boyfriend Conrad Roy to act on his suicidal thoughts, and after Roy killed himself, Carter was convicted of involuntary manslaughter. The case has received widespread attention, generating reactions ranging from rage at Ms. Carter to disbelief that she was convicted. An issue emphasized up to now is what it might mean for the First Amendment right of free speech if we hold that words can kill. In presenting the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. added 2019-07-24
    No-Platforming, Liberalism, and Students (an Interview with Robert Simpson).Alex Davies & Robert Mark Simpson - 2018
    This is the English (and extended version) of an interview originally published in Estonian in October 2018. In the interview, Simpson summarizes a particular way of defending the practice of no-platforming. The varying appeal of different defences of the practice in different socio-historical contexts (i.e. the UK/US versus a post-Soviet country such as Estonia) is discussed also.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. added 2019-06-07
    Talal Asad, Wendy Brown, Judith Butler and Saba Mahmood, Is Critique Secular? Blasphemy, Injury, and Free Speech.Lasse Thomassen - 2011 - Critical Horizons 12 (1):103-107.
  36. added 2019-06-06
    Do You Mind If I Speak Freely?: Reconceptualizing Freedom of Speech.Lisa Heldke - 1991 - Social Theory and Practice 17 (3):349-368.
    In this paper, I develop a way to conceive of free speech that begins by redefining speech. My definition affirms the fact that speaking is an activity that goes on among people in a community. Speaking, I will suggest, is an activity that involves not only the present speaker, but also others who act as listeners and potential speakers. I contend that liberal conceptions of free speech have often proven ill equipped to address certain free speech issues, precisely because they (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  37. added 2019-06-05
    Book ReviewsL. W. Sumner, The Hateful and the Obscene.Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2004. Pp. Xi+275. $60.00.Larry Alexander - 2006 - Ethics 116 (4):809-813.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38. added 2019-04-08
    Fragments.Andrej Poleev - 2017
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39. added 2019-04-08
    Essays and Letters.Andrej Poleev - 2010
    A compilation of essays and letters written between 2003 and 2009.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40. added 2019-04-01
    Pornography, Verbal Acts, and Viewpoint Discrimination.Cynthia A. Stark - 1998 - Public Affairs Quarterly 12 (4):429-445.
    Catharine MacKinnon argues that pornography is action, rather than speech. She argues further that the speech/action distinction is what delineates the scope of the First Amendment. It follows, she thinks, that pornography does not fall within the scope of the First Amendment. I argue that the legal distinction between speech and action on which MacKinnon relies is unstable and therefore cannot determine which utterances fall within the scope of the First Amendment. Indeed, attempting to sort utterances by means of the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41. added 2019-03-31
    Speech and Harm: Controversies Over Free Speech.Ishani Maitra & Mary Kate McGowan (eds.) - 2012 - Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    This volume draws on a range of approaches in order to explore the problem and determine what ought to be done about allegedly harmful speech.Most liberal societies are deeply committed to a principle of free speech. At the same time, however, there is evidence that some kinds of speech are harmful in ways that are detrimental to important liberal values, such as social equality. Might a genuine commitment to free speech require that we legally permit speech even when it is (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  42. added 2019-03-05
    Why Neil Levy is Wrong to Endorse No-Platforming.Danny Frederick - manuscript
    Neil Levy defends no-platforming people who espouse dangerous or unacceptable views. I reject his notion of higher-order evidence as authoritarian and dogmatic. I argue that no-platforming frustrates the growth of knowledge.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  43. added 2019-02-13
    Media Ethics, Free Speech, and the Requirements of Democracy.Joe Saunders & Carl Fox (eds.) - 2019 - Routledge.
    How we understand, protect, and discharge our rights and responsibilities as citizens in a democratic society committed to the principle of political equality is intimately connected to the standards and behaviour of our media in general, and our news media in particular. However, the media does not just stand between the citizenry and their leaders, or indeed between citizens and each other. The media is often the site where individuals attempt to realise some of the most fundamental democratic liberties, including (...)
    No categories
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  44. added 2018-12-31
    Enlightenment and Secularism. Foreword From the Guest Editor.Anna Tomaszewska - 2017 - Diametros 54:1-6.
  45. added 2018-12-31
    Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Self-Expression, and Kant’s Public Use of Reason.Geert Van Eekert - 2017 - Diametros 54:118-137.
    This article turns to early modern and Enlightenment advocates of tolerance in order to discover and lay bare the line of argument that informed their commitment to free speech. This line of argument will subsequently be used to assess the shift from free speech to the contemporary ideal of free self-expression. In order to take this assessment one step further, this article will finally turn to Immanuel Kant’s famous defense of the public use of reason. In the wake of Katerina (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46. added 2018-08-14
    Tenure, Academic Freedom, and Professional Competence.Alison Jaggar - 1978 - Philosophical Forum 10 (2):360.
  47. added 2018-07-18
    Liberalism and Mental Mediation.Daniel Nolan & Caroline West - 2004 - Journal of Value Inquiry 38 (2):186-202.
    Liberals agree that free speech should be protected, where speech is understood broadly to include all forms of intentional communication, including actions and pictures, not merely the spoken or written word. A surprising view about free speech in some liberal and legal circles is that communications should be protected on free-speech grounds only if the communications are mentally mediated. By “mentally mediated communication” we mean speech which communicates its message in such a way that the message can be rationally evaluated (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48. added 2018-07-03
    We Should Not Shield Ourselves From Abhorrent Beliefs.Danny Frederick - manuscript
    John Schwenkler asks whether we should shield ourselves from others' abhorrent beliefs. I expound and criticise his discussion and I explain why a rational person who wants to improve his knowledge should not shield himself from abhorrent beliefs.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49. added 2018-06-15
    What Are Basic Liberties?Attila Tanyi & Stephen K. McLeod - manuscript
    Our initial aim is to characterize, in a manner more precise than before, what Rawls calls the “analytical” method of arrival at a list of basic liberties. As we understand it, this method employs one or more general conditions that, under any just social order whatever, putative entitlements must meet in order for them to be among the basic liberties encompassed, within some just social order, by Rawls’s first principle of justice (i.e., the liberty principle). We then argue that the (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  50. added 2018-02-22
    Speech and War: Rethinking the Ethics of Speech Restrictions.Burkay Ozturk & Bob Fischer - 2018 - In Donald Alexander Downs & Chris W. Surprenant (eds.), The Value and Limits of Academic Speech: Philosophical, Political, and Legal Perspectives. New York: Routledge.
    Universities regulate speech in various ways. How should we assess when such restrictions are justified, if they ever are? Here, we propose an answer to this question. In short, we argue that we should think about speech restrictions as being like acts of war, and so should approach their justification using just war theory. We also make some suggestions about its implications. For instance, one of the jus ad bellum requirements for a just war is that you have a reasonable (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 137