Milton argues that society needs a free marketplace of ideas, a streaming fountain of knowledge as he calls it, in order to grow and progress. Does our media have a responsibility to contribute only objective information into that marketplace? Why?
I believe that the media should contribute only objective information into the marketplace of ideas, but at the same time, I don't think it really is their responsibilty to do so. Society can pick and choose what source they get their information from, but I think there are too many people who are too "lazy" or maybe neive to do that. The facts are out there, it's just that different media channels portray information in different ways. The solid facts are harder to find, which is why it is important to go to more than one source for your information. It's all based on what the author of that article, or report, etc. believes. They media holds a great deal of power, which is what makes them a "Tyranny of the Majority".
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Blog #4
Three Things that Scare Me:
1. getting divorced (once I'm actually married)
2. drowning
3. jellyfish
Three People Who Make Me Laugh:
1. my sister
2. my boyfriend
3. Dane Cook
Three Things I Love:
1. golden spoon!!
2. food in general
3. the beach
Three Things I Hate:
1. driving long distances alone
2. birds
3. most drivers on the road
Three Things I Don't Understand:
1. why girls act so helpless all the time
2. why my alarm chooses to not go off sometimes
3. why macaroni and cheese always tastes better when someone else makes it
Three Things on My Desk:
1. pictures
2. my phone
3. homework :(
Three Things I'm Doing Right Now:
1. laying in bed
2. listening to music
3. drinking water
Three Things I Want to Do Before I Die:
1. visit Spain
2. get married and have a family
3. volunteer in Africa
Three Things I Can Do:
1. snowboard
2. eat a lot
3. math
Three Things I Can't Do:
1. sing
2. play and instrument
3. join a band
Three Things or People I Think You Should Listen To:
1. God
2. The Fray
3. me
Three Things or People You Should Never Listen To:
1. nails on a chalkboard
2. dumb people
3. kanye west
Three Things I'd Like to Learn:
1. how to wakeboard
2. how to not procrastinate
3. how to play the drums
Three Shows I Watched as a Kid:
1. sesame street
2. mickey mouse club
3. i watched a whole lot of cinderella and little mermaid
Three Things I Regret:
1. going 20 mph over the speed limit in a construction zone
2. watching the movie Saw
3. not doing more sports in high school
1. getting divorced (once I'm actually married)
2. drowning
3. jellyfish
Three People Who Make Me Laugh:
1. my sister
2. my boyfriend
3. Dane Cook
Three Things I Love:
1. golden spoon!!
2. food in general
3. the beach
Three Things I Hate:
1. driving long distances alone
2. birds
3. most drivers on the road
Three Things I Don't Understand:
1. why girls act so helpless all the time
2. why my alarm chooses to not go off sometimes
3. why macaroni and cheese always tastes better when someone else makes it
Three Things on My Desk:
1. pictures
2. my phone
3. homework :(
Three Things I'm Doing Right Now:
1. laying in bed
2. listening to music
3. drinking water
Three Things I Want to Do Before I Die:
1. visit Spain
2. get married and have a family
3. volunteer in Africa
Three Things I Can Do:
1. snowboard
2. eat a lot
3. math
Three Things I Can't Do:
1. sing
2. play and instrument
3. join a band
Three Things or People I Think You Should Listen To:
1. God
2. The Fray
3. me
Three Things or People You Should Never Listen To:
1. nails on a chalkboard
2. dumb people
3. kanye west
Three Things I'd Like to Learn:
1. how to wakeboard
2. how to not procrastinate
3. how to play the drums
Three Shows I Watched as a Kid:
1. sesame street
2. mickey mouse club
3. i watched a whole lot of cinderella and little mermaid
Three Things I Regret:
1. going 20 mph over the speed limit in a construction zone
2. watching the movie Saw
3. not doing more sports in high school
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Blog #3
John Stuart Mill contends that society functions best when it is built upon a practice of doing no harm:
"[T]he sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with any evil in case he do otherwise."
Do you agree or disagree with Mill that governments have no right to interfere with an individual's liberty unless that individual's behavior will cause harm to someone else? Why?
I agree with Mill's position on the government's rights. I think that the government was put in place to create order and a sense of safety for the governed. The people should have the right to live thier lives freely, uninterupted by government. Government should only intervene when necessary; they should intervene when one individual or group is interupting anothers freedom or life. If someone is going to harm themselves, or someone else, the government should step in. Mill stated:
"The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our
own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to
obtain it."
The problem now is deciding what actions or words will cause harm. The government has the power to decide right from wrong, and it might not coincide with the opinions of the public. If someone's opinion or expression is viewed as harmful to the public, the government could intervene. Hate speech is harmful to those targeted, even if it isn't causing physical harm. I believe that there is a fine line between what can be viewed as harmful or not, in terms of speech. I think certain things will always be debated, and laws will be made and changed.
"[T]he sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. These are good reasons for remonstrating with him, or reasoning with him, or persuading him, or entreating him, but not for compelling him, or visiting him with any evil in case he do otherwise."
Do you agree or disagree with Mill that governments have no right to interfere with an individual's liberty unless that individual's behavior will cause harm to someone else? Why?
I agree with Mill's position on the government's rights. I think that the government was put in place to create order and a sense of safety for the governed. The people should have the right to live thier lives freely, uninterupted by government. Government should only intervene when necessary; they should intervene when one individual or group is interupting anothers freedom or life. If someone is going to harm themselves, or someone else, the government should step in. Mill stated:
"The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our
own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to
obtain it."
The problem now is deciding what actions or words will cause harm. The government has the power to decide right from wrong, and it might not coincide with the opinions of the public. If someone's opinion or expression is viewed as harmful to the public, the government could intervene. Hate speech is harmful to those targeted, even if it isn't causing physical harm. I believe that there is a fine line between what can be viewed as harmful or not, in terms of speech. I think certain things will always be debated, and laws will be made and changed.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Blog #2
According to Milton, how or why does truth become a heresy if a person believes things only because his pastor or government tells him so? Why does Milton find this practice dangerous?
According to Milton, truth becomes heresy if a person only believes the things his pastor/government tells because they are only hearing a censored version of the truth. The truth will still be exchanged and shared, and when they hear the truth, it will contridict what their pastor or government tells them. People will take this truth as sinful, or unlawful.
If truth becomes heresy, then truth would be spoken underground. Milton, says this is dangerous because there would be a sense of secrecy and mystery if these ideas weren't out in the open for everyone to hear or be aware of.
He also felt that progress would stop. If the truth isn't known and new ideas aren't shared, then society would cease to advance, or evolve. Pastors and government want people to conform, and only believe the information that they give them. Milton feels conformity is dangerous. People would not be to allowed to grow intellectually and ask questions.
According to Milton, truth becomes heresy if a person only believes the things his pastor/government tells because they are only hearing a censored version of the truth. The truth will still be exchanged and shared, and when they hear the truth, it will contridict what their pastor or government tells them. People will take this truth as sinful, or unlawful.
If truth becomes heresy, then truth would be spoken underground. Milton, says this is dangerous because there would be a sense of secrecy and mystery if these ideas weren't out in the open for everyone to hear or be aware of.
He also felt that progress would stop. If the truth isn't known and new ideas aren't shared, then society would cease to advance, or evolve. Pastors and government want people to conform, and only believe the information that they give them. Milton feels conformity is dangerous. People would not be to allowed to grow intellectually and ask questions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)