In On Liberty, Mill presents one of the most famous arguments in defense of free speech.
Even Mill, however, allowed for some limits. Where we should place limits on free speech is as important a question today as it was then.
For this paper, please read Andrew Marantz’s piece in The New Yorker on right-wing speakers on university campuses and listen to the debate between Nadine Strossen and Thane Rosenbaum (both are posted in the Mill module).
In your response paper, please focus on the following questions:
What are the arguments provided on both sides of the argument about limits to free speech as reported by Marantz and as exhibited in the podcast debate? How would Mill decide in this debate, and which argument(s) do you find most convincing and why?
https://www.wnyc.org/story/discourse-disrupters-american-hate-law/10 hours agohttps://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/07/02/how-social-media-trolls-turned-uc-berkeley-into-a-free-speech-circus10 hours agoJohn Stuart Mill, On Liberalism chapters 1-2 (6-38) & chapter 4 (69-86)10 hours ago
so for the liberty pdf papers are 6-38 and 69-86 only. please double check the pages because it can be tricky sometimes
Rubric Sullivan Lind Response_Paper
Rubric Sullivan Lind Response_Paper
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStructure, Grammar, Spelling, Citations
5.0 to >4.0 pts
Almost entirely free of spelling, grammar, and punctuation errors; all sources are cited correctly and completely; paper flows logically to craft a cohesive argument; paragraphs clearly guide the reader through a progression of ideas; uses transitional sentences to develop strong relationships between ideas
4.0 to >3.0 pts
May contain a few spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors, but they don’t impede understanding; sources cited correctly and completely; generally well-constructed flow of ideas; paragraphs are ordered thoughtfully, each paragraph relates to central argument; transitional sentences create a logical progression of ideas
3.0 to >2.0 pts
Several spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors that distract the reader; minor citation errors; paper jumps from one idea to the next, lacking a clear structure; occasional connection of ideas between paragraphs; simple sequential rather than transitions based on logic
Below Average Marks
Contains many spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors; incomplete citations; paper wanders from one idea to the next, making it difficult to distill the argument; limited connection of ideas between paragraphs; paragraphs may lack topic sentences or connection of ideas
2.0 to >0 pts
Pervasive spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors Missing citations; lacking organization and coherence; no connection of ideas between paragraphs; disjointed connection of ideas between paragraphs
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContent
12.5 to >7.0 pts
Excels in responding to assignment, and demonstrates mastery of course concepts and materials; presents a clear, focused, and compelling argument; paper recognizes the complexities of its argument; argument is thoroughly supported by strong, specific, and appropriate evidence; evidence is clearly introduced, analyzed and connected to the argument
7.0 to >3.0 pts
Responds appropriately to the assignment, demonstrates clear understanding of course concepts and materials; good argument, clearly articulated in thesis, though might need refining; paper’s argument is supported by relevant evidence, though not always the strongest or specific quotations; analysis of evidence needs further development
3.0 to >0 pts
Does not respond to the assignment, displays no familiarity with course concepts or materials; no identifiable argument or thesis; argument is based on little to no evidence; connections between evidence and argument are absent/incorrect
Total Points: 17.5