| Front | Back | | --- | --- | | What is the "marketplace of ideas" metaphor, and what is its core epistemological assumption? | The metaphor (derived from Mill) posits that truth emerges through open competition among opinions. It assumes epistemic optimism: the belief that truth will naturally defeat error when both are freely debated. | | In Mill's first scenario, why is suppressing a potentially true opinion wrong, and what does suppression assume? | Suppressing a true opinion deprives humanity of exchanging error for truth. Doing so assumes infallibility, which no human authority possesses (as shown by the historical persecution of Socrates and Galileo). | | What is Mill's "dead dogma" argument (the second scenario), and how does he illustrate it? | Even if an opinion is completely true, without open challenge it becomes dead dogma, which is a mere prejudice accepted on authority rather than reason. Mill illustrates this using Christian moral teachings, which he argues became hollow formulas once they ceased being actively challenged. | | What is Mill's third scenario regarding "partial truths," and what epistemological position does it require? | Most conflicting opinions contain partial truths. Combining them through free discussion yields a fuller understanding. This requires epistemic humility: recognizing that our own knowledge is limited and potentially wrong. | | How does Mill distinguish between legal silencing and social silencing, and which does he find more dangerous in democracies? |

Legal silencing is suppression by state law.
Social silencing is suppression via public opinion and social pressure.
Mill argues social silencing is more dangerous because it is pervasive and leads to widespread self-censorship.

| | What is the limit Mill places on free expression, and what famous example does he use to illustrate it? | Speech may be restricted only when it constitutes direct incitement to harm. He illustrates this with a speech delivered to an angry mob outside a corn dealer's house, which directly provokes violence. | | How does Jeremy Waldron challenge Mill's defense of free speech in The Harm in Hate Speech? | Waldron distinguishes between mere offense and dignity-based harm. He argues hate speech attacks the basic social standing of vulnerable groups, undermining their status as equal citizens, which cannot be solved by counter-speech. | | What is Catharine MacKinnon's critique of the "marketplace of ideas" regarding pornography? | MacKinnon argues pornography is not just an "idea" but an instrument of power that actively constitutes relations of domination and silences women, thereby inverting the purpose of free speech. | | What is Karl Popper's "paradox of tolerance," and how does it challenge Mill's defense of unrestricted speech? | Popper argues that unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance, because the intolerant will destroy the tolerant. Thus, society must reserve the right to restrict anti-democratic, intolerant speech to preserve its own open structure. | | What is James Fitzjames Stephen's objection to Mill's epistemic optimism? | Stephen argues Mill's belief in the self-correcting power of free discussion is naive. He asserts that society has a legitimate interest in coercively enforcing fundamental moral convictions to maintain social order. | | How does Rae Langton argue that certain forms of free speech can actually reduce the total amount of free speech in society? | Langton argues that subordinating speech (such as hate speech or pornography) silences vulnerable groups, making it impossible for their voices to be heard or taken seriously, thereby reducing overall free speech. | | How does Charles Taylor's concept of recognition challenge Mill's hands-off approach to hate speech? | Taylor argues that misrecognition (being represented in a demeaning way) inflicts real psychological and social harm, damaging a person's self-worth. This provides grounds for restricting hate speech that Mill's framework ignores. | | How does Alexander Meiklejohn's defense of free speech differ from Mill's utilitarian defense? | While Mill grounds free speech in utilitarian progress and truth-seeking, Meiklejohn grounds it in democratic self-governance: citizens must have access to all perspectives to make informed political decisions. | | What empirical evidence does Amartya Sen offer in Development as Freedom to support the value of free speech? | Sen observes that no functioning democracy with a free press has ever suffered a major famine, showing that open debate and press freedom are essential for holding governments accountable and preventing disaster. | | How do online echo chambers and algorithmic amplification challenge Mill's "marketplace of ideas"? | They exploit cognitive biases and spread misinformation faster than corrections can travel. This undermines Mill's assumption that rational counter-speech is the natural and effective remedy for false beliefs. | | How do defenders of Mill respond to contemporary arguments for censoring hate speech or misinformation? | They argue that the costs of censorship consistently outweigh its benefits, because once the power to suppress is granted, it is inevitably abused by those in power to silence political dissent and inconvenient truths. | | Mill's defense of free speech is grounded in a fallibilist epistemology, which is the view that any of our beliefs could in principle be wrong and must be open to revision. | Mill's defense of free speech is grounded in a fallibilist epistemology, which is the view that any of our beliefs could in principle be wrong and must be open to revision. | | While Mill argues that speech causing mere offence should never be restricted, Jeremy Waldron argues that hate speech causes dignity-based harm by attacking its targets' social standing. | While Mill argues that speech causing mere offence should never be restricted, Jeremy Waldron argues that hate speech causes dignity-based harm by attacking its targets' social standing. | | Karl Popper formulated the paradox of tolerance in his work *The Open Society and Its Enemies*, arguing that unlimited tolerance leads to the destruction of tolerance by the intolerant. | Karl Popper formulated the paradox of tolerance in his work *The Open Society and Its Enemies*, arguing that unlimited tolerance leads to the destruction of tolerance by the intolerant. | | In the 1980s, Catharine MacKinnon helped draft the Indianapolis ordinance to allow women to sue pornography producers, arguing that pornography actively constitutes relations of domination. | In the 1980s, Catharine MacKinnon helped draft the Indianapolis ordinance to allow women to sue pornography producers, arguing that pornography actively constitutes relations of domination. |

1. Being human6 subtopics

2. Aesthetics3 subtopics

3. Epistemology3 subtopics

4. Ethics3 subtopics

5. Philosophy of religion3 subtopics

6. Philosophy of science3 subtopics

7. Political philosophy3 subtopics

8. Social philosophy3 subtopics

9. HL extension: Philosophy and contemporary issues3 subtopics

10. Prescribed philosophical texts12 subtopics

IB Philosophy 10.12.3 Freedom of Speech and the Marketplace of Ideas Flashcards