1. Flesh out the utility and disutility at more length
You’ve made some good basic points about the utility and disutility that might be brought about by the publication of the photos, but try to (1) give more detail about how and where you see the welfare being created or destroyed, and (2) see if you can think through more about the potential benefits that would be brought about, or the potential problems that would occur. So this was a good start, but you want to try to think it through in as much detail as you can muster. Particularly, you want to be sure that you’re thinking about the issue from all sides. In this case, there are important principles of journalistic freedom in play, as well as the potential for damaged reputations. The newspaper is an important vehicle by which ideas get exchanged, and the exchange of ideas is central to Mill’s reasoning, so giving the greatest possible leeway to the paper to publish what it finds newsworthy is something important in terms of the freedom of expression. Hiding the students’ identities does impose on the paper’s ability to tell the story, AND, it also means that those students might miss out on the opportunity to have people argue against them and thereby the opportunity to exchange their wrong ideas for right ones. Freedom of expression doesn’t mean freedom from being criticized and argued with (remember, Mill specifically says we can “argue with and remonstrate with” people we disagree with – to remonstrate means to forcefully and disapprovingly object to something). So there are serious aspects to both sides. You want to be sure you’re considering all of those when you make your case.
2. Show your calculation more
Show your work a little more in section three. That is, try to give reasons why you think one consideration is more important than another. For example, if you were arguing that the benefits to freedom of expression and belief are greater if we limit what the paper can publish (by enforcing a rule that they’ll blur potentially embarrassing photos of students), you might say something like “I think freedom of expression is better protected if we protect the identity of the students: first, students are at a more vulnerable stage in their lives socially, and I think the threat of being publically embarrassed will have a more chilling effect on their willingness to put forward ideas. Second, as Henry Johnson points out in the case study, publishing recognizable photos might shift the whole debate onto the individual culpability of the students pictured, and distract us from the important conversation about racism and privilege: since Mill’s argument about freedom of expression focuses on the importance for the greatest good that comes from having open discussions, anything that interferes with these discussions would be destroying welfare instead of creating it. So if we look at the reasons Mill has for supporting freedom of expression, we see that those reasons are best furthered by protecting the students’ identities rather than revealing them, even though it does impede the newspaper’s freedom to some extent.”
3. Make sure you follow the instructions
Be sure that you’re following the instructions very closely, so that you’re certain to answer all the important questions I want you to answer. This paper is partly showing your understanding of the arguments we covered by showing you applying those arguments in detail. In order to demonstrate your understanding, then, you want to be sure to really do the utilitarian calculation in detail. The instructions are a way of reminding you of all the important parts you have to cover in order to do that, so be sure you’re doing everything that’s listed. This is a good general start, but it doesn’t go into enough detail for me to really see you demonstrate a deep understanding of the material.
4. Be sure you include Mill’s reasons
Remember – don’t just include Mill’s reasons why he thinks freedom of expression is so important. Say how it relates to his specific concerns in On Liberty to the general Utilitarian principle and be sure to use those reasons when you’re thinking about what the paper’s policy should be (rather than just general ideas about welfare). By focusing on Mill’s reasons about expression instead of just his conclusion and the general Utilitarian principle, you (1) can illustrate the connection between those ideas; (2) can get more particular about your argument – there will be some interference with total free expression no matter what happens in this case (either the students will be embarrassed and might possibly be less willing to express their opinions in the future, or the paper will have to stifle part of the story to protect the students’ identities), so just saying that we’re concerned to encourage free expression doesn’t do any work here – the reasoning behind why we’re concerned with free expression gets you further, because you can see which considerations will most further those reasons and why.
5. Organization
Reread your draft for organization once you’ve finished a rough draft. Often, the order in which you organize ideas makes a huge difference to how easy it is to follow your reasoning and/or the reasoning of the philosopher you’re explaining. For example, if you bring up someone’s conclusion, you should explain his/her reasons in support of that conclusion right away, rather than mentioning the conclusion in one paragraph and then talking about the support later in the paper. Similarly with your own conclusions – give your reasons in support of your conclusions immediately before or after you say what your conclusion is, rather than mentioning what you conclude about an issue on one page, going on to talk about something else for a while, and then circling back around to provide some reasons. The connections between ideas become extremely hard to follow if the ideas that connect up to one another are scattered around, so be sure to organize ideas together with their reasons so that your reasoning is clear and persuasive.
No comments:
Post a Comment