Negative effect of freedom of speech essay
1. Negative effect of freedom of speech essay
the idea behind freedom of speech was to ensure every person had the right to voice his or her thoughts or opinions.we're free to talk about something and enjoy different books and movies we are free to express our own beliefs without being censored by others.people can often confuse freedom of speech with being able to say and believe anything. freedom of speech is perceived to be limitless. those who are the devout may see it as a means to say whatever they wish. freedom of speech
2. positive and negative effect of freedom of speech essay
Answer: Freedom of speech is positive because it permits citizens to influence and spread information to one another without the fear of government censorship. The biggest disadvantage of freedom of speech is the fact that we cannot determine and measure hate speech. There is a difference between freedom of speech and freedom of consequence; therefore a person practicing his/her right to freedom of speech is prone to lead to violence.
3. Should student's right of freedom of speech be restricted on campus?
Answer:
No they shouldn't be an open communication is necessary for student to learn and improve
4. freedom of speech is ethical in nature?
Answer:
BY THE ETHICS CENTRE 22 FEB 2017
Freedom of speech refers to people’s ability to say what they want without punishment.
Most people focus on punishment by the state but social disapproval or protest can also have a chilling effect on free speech. The consequences of some kinds of speech can make people feel less confident in speaking their mind at all.
Since most philosophers agree there is no such thing as absolute free speech, the debate largely focuses on why we should restrict what people say. Many will state, “I believe in free speech except…”. What comes after that? This is where the discussion on what the exceptions and boundaries to free speech are.
Even John Stuart Mill, who is so influential on this topic we need to discuss his ideas at length, thought free speech has limits. You would usually be free to say, “Immigrants are stealing our jobs”. If you say so in front of an angry mob of recently laid off workers who also happen to be outside an immigrant resource centre, you might cause violence. Mill believed you should face consequences for remarks like these.
This belief stems from Mill’s harm principle, which states we should be free to act unless we’re harming someone else. He thought the only speech we should forbid is the kind that causes direct harm to other people.
Mill’s support for free speech is related to his consequentialist views. He thought we should be governed by laws leading to the best long-term outcomes. By allowing people to voice their views, even those we find immoral, society gives itself the best chance of learning what’s “true”.
This happens in two ways. First, the majority who think something is immoral might be wrong. Second, if the majority are right, they’ll be more confident of their position if they’ve successfully argued for it. In either case, free speech will improve society.
If we silence dissenting views, it assumes we already have the right opinion. Mill said “all silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility”.
Accepting the limits of our own knowledge means allowing others to speak their mind – even if we don’t like what they’ve got to say.
As Noam Chomsky said, “If you’re in favour of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favour of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise”.
Free speech advocates tend to limit restrictions on speech to ‘direct’ harms like violence or defamation. Others think the harm principle is too narrow in definition. They believe some speech can be emotionally damaging, socially marginalising, and even descend into hate speech. They believe the speech that causes ‘indirect’ harms should also be restricted.
This leads people to claim citizens do not have the right to be offensive or insulting. Others disagree. Some don’t believe offence is socially or psychologically harmful. Furthermore, they suggest we cannot reasonably predict what kinds of speech will cause offence. Whether speech is acceptable or not becomes subjective. Some might find any view offensive if it disagrees with their own, which would see increasing calls for censorship.
In response, a range of theorists suggest offending is harmful and causes injury. They also say it has insidious effects on social cohesion because it places victims in a constant state of vulnerability.
In Australia, Race Commissioner Tim Soutphommasane is a strong proponent of this view. He believes certain kinds of speech “undermine the assurance of security to which every member of a good society is entitled”. Judith Butler goes further. She believes once you’ve been the victim of “injurious speech”, you lose control over your sense of place. You no longer know where you are welcome or when the next abuse will occur.
For these reasons, those who support only narrow limits to free speech are sometimes accused of prioritising speech above other goods like harmony and respect. As Soutphommasane says, “there is a heavy price to freedom that is imposed on victims”.
Whether you think offences count as harms or not will help determine how free you think speech should be. Regardless of where we draw the line, there will still be room for people to say things that are obnoxious, undiplomatic or insensitive without formal punishment. Having a right to speak won’t mean you are always seen as saying the right thing.
This encourages us to include ideas from deontology and virtue ethics into our thinking. As well as asking what will lead to the best society or which kinds of speech will cause harm, consider different questions. What are our duties to others when it comes to the way we talk? How would a wise or virtuous person use speech?
Explanation:
sana makatulong
Answer:
Most people focus on punishment by the state but social disapproval or protest can also have a chilling effect on free speech. The consequences of some kinds of speech can make people feel less confident in speaking their mind at all.
Since most philosophers agree there is no such thing as absolute free speech, the debate largely focuses on why we should restrict what people say. Many will state, “I believe in free speech except…”. What comes after that? This is where the discussion on what the exceptions and boundaries to free speech are.
Even John Stuart Mill, who is so influential on this topic we need to discuss his ideas at length, thought free speech has limits. You would usually be free to say, “Immigrants are stealing our jobs”. If you say so in front of an angry mob of recently laid off workers who also happen to be outside an immigrant resource centre, you might cause violence. Mill believed you should face consequences for remarks like these.
This belief stems from Mill’s harm principle, which states we should be free to act unless we’re harming someone else. He thought the only speech we should forbid is the kind that causes direct harm to other people.
Mill’s support for free speech is related to his consequentialist views. He thought we should be governed by laws leading to the best long-term outcomes. By allowing people to voice their views, even those we find immoral, society gives itself the best chance of learning what’s “true”.
This happens in two ways. First, the majority who think something is immoral might be wrong. Second, if the majority are right, they’ll be more confident of their position if they’ve successfully argued for it. In either case, free speech will improve society.
If we silence dissenting views, it assumes we already have the right opinion. Mill said “all silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility”.
Accepting the limits of our own knowledge means allowing others to speak their mind – even if we don’t like what they’ve got to say.
As Noam Chomsky said, “If you’re in favour of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favour of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise”.
Free speech advocates tend to limit restrictions on speech to ‘direct’ harms like violence or defamation. Others think the harm principle is too narrow in definition. They believe some speech can be emotionally damaging, socially marginalising, and even descend into hate speech. They believe the speech that causes ‘indirect’ harms should also be restricted.
Explanation:
I hope it helps.
5. There are many forms of freedom guaranteed to us by our laws. Hence, as a student what kinds of freedom are you entitled here in our school? Essay
Answer:
human rights
Explanation:
Various "basic" rights that cannot be violated under any circumstances are set forth in international human rights documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The rights established by these documents include economic, social, cultural, political and civil rights.
6. As a Filipino citizen student what role you can play in protecting our freedom?essay
as a student I need to role a good manners any time
7. What is freedom of speech?
Answer:
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.
8. Speech about freedom
Answer:
it is expressing your opinions publicly. you could say anything without digrading others, insulting or giving false accusations.
9. Is the Social Media an appropriate platform for practicing Freedom of Speech?(help gagstu essay yan ha)
Answer:
Current legal precedent conclusively establishes that social media users do not have a right to free speech on private social media platforms.
Explanation:
Nakita ko lang sorry kulang sana makatulong
10. Malayang Pamamahayag (Freedom of Speech)?
Answer:
Sorry po hindi ko po maintindihan.
11. write and deliver a powerful and inspiring speech about the freedom of expression role you are the president of the student council
Answer:
how are u and ate K No one day and night and I don't know what
expressing ourselves is very important because in this way we can share with others what we think of them, there is also no problem if we become emotional because we know in ourselves that it helps ease our feelings depending on the situation.
hope for the best and good luck with that, keet it up! (人 •͈ᴗ•͈)
12. Freedom from bullying (speech)
Answer:
wala po bang word limit?
13. Anya ti freedom of speech
Answer:
opo tama po kayo anya freedom of speech
14. what is freedom of speech,?
Answer:
The right to express your opinions without government restraints.
15. Speech example about freedom
Answer:
Freedom of speech includes the right:
Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”). Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969). To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages.
Explanation:
16. should there be limits to freedom of speech
Answer:
However, while Americans and their politicians brag about their people' right to free speech and expression, they refuse to recognize the absence of hate speech protections.
Explanation:
According to https://www.theodysseyonline.com/freedom-speech-limitations
17. speech about freedom
FREEDOM
What is freedom? For me freedom is a thing given to a people that is known for being responsible on handling it. Freedom makes us break some limitations that our elders provided back when we we're young and can't yet handle complicated things. Freedom is something we can all have when we have reach the right age and is capable of having it. Freedom is like having a chance of deciding on your own, because you are free and others can't control you.
For me freedom is important. Because without freedom, we will instantly feel controlled or being locked up by someone. Freedom has the ability to make us feel happy because it allows us to break our limitations and do things without anyone's approval. Without freedom, we can feel that something is missing on our personality because we can't do something that others are capable of doing.
But in my opinion, having the chance of claiming our freedom also includes some responsibilities. Those responsibilities are made due to some people that are abusing their freedom. Freedom is a rare thing to be given for a person. If someone give us our freedom, that person might have a huge trust on us, which we should not break.
#CarryOnLearning
#PANG-CAT
18. As a student,is it okay to share or give your opinion about Freedom of Speech?Why or Why not?
yes, because this is a democratic country wherein you are free to share your thoughts and opinion. yeah this topic discuss the right which include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers but it is not enough to keep your opinion to yourself. there are principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.
19. disadvantages of freedom of speech
for a short answer. It's disadvantage is you get used to talk nonsense thing and you don't try to listen to others.
20. Ano ang Freedom of Speech?
Freedom of Speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.
21. Speech about of freedom expression
Answer:
Your voice matters. You have the right to say what you think, share information and demand a better world. You also have the right to agree or disagree with those in power, and to express these opinions in peaceful protests.
Explanation:
I hope it helps you
22. what is FREEDOM OF SPEECH
freedom of speech
• a political ideology
• is the right to express any opinions without censorship or restraint
• is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction
23. Is there freedom of speech in Japanese literature
Yes because there are people in Japan so there is human rights.
24. what is freedom of speech
Answer:
Constitutionally backed right of every FilipinoExplanation:
The freedom of speech is a constitutionally granted right of every FIlipino citizens. Article III Section 4 of the Bill of Rights says: "No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances." This means that any Filipino can speak their opinions or ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship or legal action.
While the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, it is not without prejudice to the rights of others. Freedom of speech does not mean the freedom to speak about falsehoods or propagating malicious news about any individual or organization. Giving an opinion is different from sharing maligning statements:
Example:
Opinion: Maria is ugly.
Malicious Statements: Maria stole my money.
The first statement could be debated as the concept of beauty is subjective. Hence, it is an opinion. You can say this and this is guaranteed by the Constitution.
But the second statement, when untrue, is tantamount to defamation, a crime punishable according to Philippine law. When written out in social media or other printed material it could be construed as libel or cyber-libel. Even if the statement were true, the proper way to say that would be in a court of law and not on social media.
For more information:
Libel: https://brainly.ph/question/546107
25. freedom of speech kahulugan
Answer:
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.
Answer:
Freedom of speech is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction.
26. What is freedom of speech to you?
Answer:
Freedom of speech is the right to say whatever you like about whatever you like, whenever you like, right? Wrong.
'Freedom of speech is the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, by any means.'
Freedom of speech and the right to freedom of expression applies to ideas of all kinds including those that may be deeply offensive. But it comes with responsibilities and we believe it can be legitimately restricted.
When freedom of speech can be restricted
You might not expect us to say this, but in certain circumstances free speech and freedom of expression can be restricted.
Governments have an obligation to prohibit hate speech and incitement. And restrictions can also be justified if they protect specific public interest or the rights and reputations of others.
Any restrictions on freedom of speech and freedom of expression must be set out in laws that must in turn be clear and concise so everyone can understand them.
People imposing the restrictions (whether they are governments, employers or anyone else) must be able to demonstrate the need for them, and they must be proportionate.
All of this has to be backed up by safeguards to stop the abuse of these restrictions and incorporate a proper appeals process.
...and when it can't
Restrictions that do not comply with all these conditions violate freedom of expression.
We consider people put in prison solely for exercising their right to free speech to be prisoners of conscience.
Explanation:
27. freedom of speech should be restricted
Answer:
I don't think it should be restricted, as a person we have the rights to speak for injustices and inequality. If freedom of speech would be restricted, those who are on top will rule and control the those under them. Freedom of speech should not be restricted since it allows us to improve as a country, resolve issues and become a well-developed country.
Explanation:
28. what is the importance freedom of speech
Explanation:
Freedom of expression is a core value in the democratic process. It ensures people are able to discuss, exchange, and debate ideas. This human right allows individuals and communities to find information which is important to them and share it with others, without censorship or reprisals.
29. There was no freedom of speech during this era.
Spanish era in the Philippines
30. speech about freedom of expression
Answer:
Your voice matters. You have the right to say what you think, share information and demand a better world. You also have the right to agree or disagree with those in power, and to express these opinions in peaceful protests.
Exercising these rights - without fear or unlawful interference - is central to living in an open and fair society; one in which people can access justice and enjoy their human rights.
Yet governments around the world routinely imprison people – or worse – for speaking out, even though almost every country’s constitution refers to the value of ‘free speech’.
Governments have a duty to prohibit hateful, inciteful speech but many abuse their authority to silence peaceful dissent by passing laws criminalising freedom of expression. This is often done in the name of counter-terrorism, national security or religion. More recently, freedom of expression has come under threat by authorities clamping down on activists, NGOs and individuals helping refugees and migrants.
How governments tolerate unfavourable views or critical voices is often a good indication of how they treat human rights generally.
