Toleration and Freedom of Expression

This topic examines why and how far a society should tolerate beliefs and practices it disapproves of, and what justifies the special protection of free speech.

Definition

Toleration is the deliberate restraint from interfering with conduct or beliefs one disapproves of but has the power to suppress; freedom of expression is the liberty to communicate ideas, distinctively protected against state restriction.

Scope

Covers the concept and paradoxes of toleration, the Lockean case for religious toleration, Mill's argument from truth and individuality for free discussion, autonomy- and democracy-based theories of free expression, and the limits set by harm, offence, and hate speech.

Core questions

• Why tolerate views and practices one believes to be wrong?
• What is the 'paradox of toleration', and can it be resolved?
• What grounds the special protection of free speech — truth, autonomy, or democracy?
• Where are the legitimate limits of expression (incitement, hate speech, offence)?

Key concepts

• toleration
• the paradox of toleration
• religious freedom
• the marketplace of ideas
• speaker and listener autonomy
• hate speech
• the limits of expression

Key theories

The case for toleration

Locke argues that civil authority lacks the competence and right to coerce religious belief, since genuine faith cannot be compelled and the magistrate's task is confined to protecting civil interests, grounding religious toleration.

The argument from truth and individuality

Mill defends free discussion on the grounds that suppressing opinion robs humanity of truth or of the vivid grasp of it, and that liberty of expression is essential to individuality and human progress.

The autonomy theory of expression

Scanlon argues that the special status of free expression rests on the autonomy of listeners, who as rational agents are entitled to weigh reasons for themselves rather than have the state restrict speech on the ground that it might persuade them.

History

Doctrines of toleration emerged from Europe's wars of religion, articulated by Bayle and by Locke's Letter Concerning Toleration (1689). Mill's On Liberty (1859) generalized the case to opinion as such, and 20th-century theorists such as Scanlon and Meiklejohn developed autonomy- and democracy-based justifications of free speech.

Debates

What justifies free speech?

Whether the special protection of expression is best grounded in the discovery of truth (Mill), the autonomy of agents (Scanlon), or the requirements of democratic self-government.

The limits of toleration

How a tolerant society should treat the intolerant, and whether hate speech or deeply offensive expression may be restricted without abandoning the commitment to toleration.

Key figures

• John Locke
• John Stuart Mill
• T. M. Scanlon
• Pierre Bayle

Seminal works

• mill1859
• lockeletter1689
• scanlon1972

Frequently asked questions

What is the paradox of toleration?

It is the puzzle that toleration seems to require putting up with what one judges wrong, which can look like indifference or weakness; resolving it involves distinguishing disapproving of conduct from being entitled to suppress it.