1

FREEDOM OF SPEECH: ETHICAL THEORIES

Freedom of Speech: Ethical Theories

Daniel Escobedo

Arizona State University

Mike Fox - OGL 345

 2
FREEDOM OF SPEECH: ETHICAL THEORIES

Free speech is a term that can be traced all the way back to ancient Greek times. At that

time, a rise of democracy first began in Athens. Politics, religion and massive criticism of the

government began the process of becoming less taboo. Today, freedom of speech stands as a law

and human right, which will continue to be protected by the Bill of Rights, as it stands as the

First Amendment amongst the ten. The bill of rights was established December 15, 1791. The

constitutional right of freedom of speech has been the topic of scrutiny over the years, due to the

fact, that it is a very vague term. Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution does it break down what is or

isn’t appropriate and falls under the category of free speech, therefore leaving the specifics of

legal protection under the law. In the early 1900s, the Supreme Court took the first form of

action to put restrictions on the term, therefore bringing us the Espionage Act of 1917. (First

Amendment Encyclopedia, 2019) Over the years, freedom of speech has also been the subject of

debate when it comes to educational environment, artistic expression and patriotism.

Freedom of speech, along with religious freedom, was the reason the U.S. established

themselves as a country, separate from England. It has allowed individuals to fight for change in

unjust situations. Freedom of speech opened the conversation and acceptance of freedom of

expression, which expanded the world of art and music. Freedom of speech continued a rise in

democracy, which opened conversations, like debates, in the world of politics. For all the same

reasons of why someone would stand in favor of freedom of speech, there are many who would

say, that not everything spoken aloud or expressed deserves the right of legal protection. With

any point of communication, the opportunity of interpretation becomes more common and

through that can come agreements or offense, depending on the viewer/listener.

Misinterpretation brings on misunderstandings and conflict, which in high stress situations can

be very dangerous. In 1917, the Espionage Act was created to ensure “disloyal, profane,
 3
FREEDOM OF SPEECH: ETHICAL THEORIES

scurrilous, or abusive language” about the Constitution, the government, the American uniform,

or the flag stands well outside the lines of legal freedom of speech. (University of Houston,

2019) This is one of the first precautions applied to freedom of speech.

The virtue perspective is the perspective, that is very specific to a person’s character.

One’s virtue ties in with their moral compass and their overall “why” in life. The Foundation of

Economic Education offered a great example of the virtue perspective and free speech, when it

came to speaking of another person. “Someone who desires to produce a movie, which plausibly

presents his fantasies as if they were true, and in so doing dishonors the memory and reputation

of a former president, might be dissuaded by means of reason or shame.” For a person standing

from a virtue perspective, they would find themselves in the place of a moral obligation to use

the power of speech to make a point, push for change and ultimately help others. To them, the

ends justify the means, therefore a person in favor of this would push to carry this out no matter

what their actions could bring forth, especially since the consequential factors are not taken into

consideration for someone with this point of view.

Because Freedom of Speech started as such a broad term and has since then evolved, it

has many reasons of why someone would stand their opinions on either side of the topic. When it

comes to freedom of speech, a person can still be against the first amendment, while still having

a moral obligation behind their reasons. The Espionage Act, as mentioned before is a clear

example; A person, who has a high integral level of something similar to an act of patriotism will

pride themselves on that one factor, as a characteristic trait. Therefore, they would vouch that not

all levels of freedom of speech are necessary and appropriate or moral to the end goal, thus

calling for the restriction, which were later brought on.

 4
FREEDOM OF SPEECH: ETHICAL THEORIES

The consequentialist perspective is the perspective of ethical theory, which follows the

consequences of an action, based on both being immoral and proper. As humans, our minds go

through a process, which ultimately leads us to a final decision. (Columbia University, 2019)

Part of that process is analyzing the risk behind our decisions; the cause and effect factor.

Coming from this perspective, a person would consider factors of how others would feel and

interpret the information or opinions they are putting out there, as that is a direct consequence of

their own actions. The difference between a person in favor and someone opposed is simple;

Either the person felt a common goal would come to light through this process, while the other

feels as though the act itself would have zero affect or benefit on the end result, therefore the act

itself isn’t worth the effort needed to carry out the process. Someone standing from a

consequentialist perspective would hold onto this step more than any other person, because their

highest priority is what will come from the action not just the action by itself.

Columbia University released a report, speaking on consequentialism and how freedom

of speech was involved in our government.

“United States v. Alvarez recently invalidated a federal criminal law that

prohibited lying about receiving a military honor. The plurality opinion,

authored by Justice Kennedy, disavowed free speech consequentialism at

all level of abstraction, proclaiming, that content-based restrictions on

speech are subject to strict scrutiny unless the speech fit into a small

number of historically unprotected categories.”

This was one of the restrictions on freedom of speech, which came very long after the Espionage

Act. The United State judicial system called for these restrictions, because their point of view

was against freedom of speech on the terms of consequentialism. Their highest priority wasn’t
 5
FREEDOM OF SPEECH: ETHICAL THEORIES

honoring that privilege but while also securing the honor of the military positions and giving

them the proper respect, that was due.

Deontological perspectives are an interesting point of view compared to virtue and

consequentialism: “Deontological ethics holds that at least some acts are morally obligatory

regardless of their consequences for human welfare,” explained online site, Britannica. A

deontological view focuses on the idea, that even though an act can be immoral on its own, it can

be overlooked, only because it has a beneficial result to an overall situation or cause. An example

of deontology can be compared to multiple movie story lines; like the Jedi Code from the Star

Wars saga.

“The Jedi Code is a set of rules guiding all the Jedi in Star Wars universe.

When they stray from this Code the Jedi can be seduced by the dark side

of the Force. It includes rules like controlling one’s emotions avoiding

harm to other living beings. The Jedi Seem to guide their behavior as

much as possible according to these rules, making them deontologists,”

as compared by an online site’s (Philosophy Terms), published article. The Jedi Code and those

who follow it are in favor of this.

People in the real world have a similar code and it is our everyday laws, which we are

expected to follow. Someone who follows a pro-deontological perspective towards freedom of

speech would choose to overlook other laws, for the sake of correctly carrying out freedom of

speech, but with its restrictions of its own. Their highest priority is carrying out that one element

properly, and all other factors do not matter in that situation. A person, who is against the

deontological views of freedom of speech has more a personality type, which would fall under
 6
FREEDOM OF SPEECH: ETHICAL THEORIES

the consequentialism category. They would look at this situation and understand that there are

more factors involved rather than just achieving that one goal of successfully sharing an opinion

or idea.

Freedom of speech has always will have a place in this world; politics, relationships,

social surroundings, etc., and as long as the First Amendment stands amongst the Constitution as

it does the idea will be validly available for interpretation and debate, as it has for the last 200+

years along with the ethical perspectives tied into them. Ethical perspectives, which have created

and chosen for ourselves are based off of a person’s characteristics, the environment they are in,

the risk involved and the overall end goal, in which they are trying to complete. They hold the

standard, which we would expect from making a decision. When the two are put together in any

situation, all factors of risk and interpretation greaten and any person is able to interchange their

opinion from pro to against, between consequentialism, virtue or even the deontological

perspective.
 7
FREEDOM OF SPEECH: ETHICAL THEORIES

Works Cited

● Goldberg, Erica. (2019). Columbia Law Review. Free Speech Consequentialism.

https://columbialawreview.org/content/free-speech-consequentialism/

● Foundation for Economic Education. (1996). Virtues of Free Speech.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fee.org/articles/the-virtues-of-free-speech//amp

● Asp, David. (2019). The First Amendment Encyclopedia. Espionage Act of 1917.

https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1045/espionage-act-of-1917

● Philosophy Terms. (2019). Deontology.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/philosophyterms.com/deontology/amp/

● Encyclopedia Brittanica. (2019) Deontoligical Ethics.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/deontological-ethics