Hate Speech, the Priority of Liberty, and the Temptations of Nonideal Theory

Are government restrictions on hate speech consistent with the priority of liberty? This relatively narrow policy question will serve as the starting point for a wider discussion of the use and abuse of nonideal theory in contemporary political philosophy, especially as practiced on the academic lef...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Taylor, Robert S. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Springer Science + Business Media B. V 2012
In: Ethical theory and moral practice
Year: 2012, Volume: 15, Issue: 3, Pages: 353-368
Further subjects:B equality of opportunity
B Nonideal theory
B Priority of liberty
B Hate Speech
B Rawls
Online Access: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1785696742
003 DE-627
005 20220112044106.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220112s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1007/s10677-011-9287-6  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1785696742 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1785696742 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Taylor, Robert S.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Hate Speech, the Priority of Liberty, and the Temptations of Nonideal Theory 
264 1 |c 2012 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Are government restrictions on hate speech consistent with the priority of liberty? This relatively narrow policy question will serve as the starting point for a wider discussion of the use and abuse of nonideal theory in contemporary political philosophy, especially as practiced on the academic left. I begin by showing that hate speech (understood as group libel) can undermine fair equality of opportunity for historically-oppressed groups but that the priority of liberty seems to forbid its restriction. This tension between free speech and equal opportunity creates a dilemma for liberal egalitarians. Nonideal theory apparently offers an escape from this dilemma, but after examining three versions of such an escape strategy, I conclude that none is possible: liberal egalitarians are indeed forced to choose between liberty and equality in this case and others. I finish the paper by examining its implications for other policy arenas, including markets in transplantable human organs and women’s reproductive services. 
650 4 |a Rawls 
650 4 |a equality of opportunity 
650 4 |a Nonideal theory 
650 4 |a Priority of liberty 
650 4 |a Hate Speech 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Ethical theory and moral practice  |d Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 1998  |g 15(2012), 3, Seite 353-368  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)320527093  |w (DE-600)2015306-5  |w (DE-576)104558555  |x 1572-8447  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:15  |g year:2012  |g number:3  |g pages:353-368 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/23254294  |x JSTOR 
856 |u https://philpapers.org/archive/TAYHST.pdf  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h repository [oa repository (via OAI-PMH title and first author match)] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-011-9287-6  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 15  |j 2012  |e 3  |h 353-368 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4033755640 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1785696742 
LOK |0 005 20220112044106 
LOK |0 008 220112||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-12-30#4F1B34CE2D0238395A5BDCE30D773739D509F0C5 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/23254294 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw