Liberty and Autonomy Essays

You are expected to engage very directly with the texts, quoting and citing the material (not just lecture notes!). 1. In On Liberty, John Stuart Mill advances a forceful case for a wide range of civil liberties, including nearly unrestricted freedom of speech. Present the central arguments for Mill’s position, then consider the ways in which Langton/Waldron challenge Mill’s view, focusing specifically on hate speech. Ultimately, do you think that certain forms of hate speech should be politically regulated? If so, why, and how do you draw the line? If not, how do you justify your position in light of the apparent harms produced by hate speech? 2. In her review article on hate speech, Rae Langton claims that autonomy—or the capacity to control one’s own life—has a relational dimension: “what options are visible to you, and what autonomous choices are available to you, will depend on the conceptual resources and self-understandings available to you, all of which can be constrained by hate speech itself. Our autonomy is constrained by the social meaning of the options we have, which in turn is given in part by the speech of those around us.” Explore in some detail how Young’s analysis of feminine embodiment and the analysis of blindness (e.g., the case of Daniel Kish) in the Invisibilia podcast relate to this notion of “relational autonomy.” To what extent do you think that publicly accessible labels, stereotypes, and expectations constrain people’s identities and affect their capacities? What, if anything, can be done about it? Basic Requirements:  Send as a single document  Include the word count of each essay.  No title page  Times 12 pt font or equivalent.  May be single—spaced  1 – 1.25 inch margins  Parenthetical citations are sufficient, unless you are using other editions or external materials Essay Expectations I will be grading your papers on the basis of three major considerations: How well have you understood the material? How effectively have you expressed your ideas? How compelling is your evaluation? In other words, I will be looking at comprehension, communication, and analysis. Here are some of the particular things that I will considering when assessing your papers: 1. Comprehension  Did you grasp the relevant ideas?  Did you understand the motivations behind these ideas?  Have you drawn appropriate connections between the various claims of a theorist? 2. Communication  Have you expressed yourself in a clear and intelligible way?  Have you used examples effectively and avoided ambiguities?  Have you made sufficient use of the material? Have you integrated quotes effectively?  Is everything in your paper relevant to the topic?  Have you made your arguments clear?  Did you answer the questions fully? 3. Analysis  Have you identified weak points or ambiguities in the text?  Is your position well-supported?  Have you anticipated and responded to objections or other views?  Does your voice as a philosopher come through?  Is there evidence that you’ve thought about these materials outside of the classroom or in an original way? Have you done more than simply restate what has been claimed in class? …