Restraints on Speech Have Been Abolished but We Live in a New Age of Social Control - Essay Example

It is totally insane to claim that one can say whatever they wish in the post-censorship age yet there is restraining to ensure one does not think the wrong thoughts, or they do not say the wrong things. Additionally, it is useless to grant free speech yet one cannot be free to use language without being cautious not to use the wrong language. The government takes any controversial views as offensive and unsuitable by a host of interest groups due to the public’s indifference towards the basic values of a free society.

Nevertheless, the collection of personal information over the internet is bound to raise a plethora of complaints from the public especially because it will exert immense control on free speech like never before. Malik Kenan argues that heretics who offend like Darwin and Galileo have always taken society forwards and most importantly, these critics highlight the importance of free speech; He further points out that are more inclusive and very diverse society claims to preserve diversity but does not seem to leave any room for a diversity of opinions.

Views that offend or transgress moral boundaries that have been entranced firmly in society are intolerable, and to describe some ideas as offensive is to step outside the bounds of rational debate. He further contends that offensiveness can only be an insult to tradition, religious idea, or one’s emotional disposition, which cannot be erased through an argument, thus, despite its glorification in society, a refusal to offend does not in any way show respect for oneself or others. According to him, respect for oneself can only be acquired through self-belief, willingness to take a stand, even if it means taking an unpopular position, and the refusal to see oneself as a victim.

Similarly, respecting others requires one not to ignore others but to engage with them through critical debates that question their ideas and arguments to establish their truthfulness; society becomes inane without constructive criticism. Resorting to censorship is a sign of lack of confidence in an individual’s capacity to convince the audience of an alternative opinion, and is a typical quick-fix solution that has pervaded the post-cold war, post-ideological times. In a desperate measure to regulate society, the politicians and intellectuals have constantly defined boundaries on things that can be said or done.

The best article between Malik Kenan and Wolf Daniel is the former because it provides both an incisive and comprehensive view on the notion of free speech, in addition to being thoroughly objective unlike the later. Firstly, the argument presented in Malik Kenan is not only strong but also logically sound and convincing because it derives from information that is both justified and justifiable. The writer provides a case study as a supporting basis for his argument and then develops it through logical sequencing and reasoning, thus, arriving at a reasonable conclusion that is based on textual pieces of evidence.

It is easy to follow the argument because the article is focused and concise because by narrowing the scope of the topic and expounding on the main idea, the writer has managed to tackle all the main issues in depth, thus, providing a clear flow for the content. The writer does not make any inane assumptions or propositions, and he does not appeal to pity, rather, he embarks on building his article through a strong and logical argument by making cross-references to key authorities in the past who have left a mark in history.

For instance, the introduction to this article makes a powerful and profound allusion to ancient philosophers such as Galileo and Darwin whose thoughts and ideas have influenced scholarly thinking from the classical period up to date. By citing such remarkable philosophers, the writer provides a scholarly framework for his article, distinguishing it from popular media, and promises to deliver both a scholarly and critical argument based on justifiable evidence. The writer concludes his article by consolidating his ideas in the body of the article to arrive at a conclusion that aptly ties up the whole article to achieve a harmonious ending.