u/Junior-Chemistry-950

I’ve been doing some reading on the philosophy of liberty and free expression and there is one question I have become increasingly interested in: Why are libertarian concerns regarding free speech almost exclusively focused on the external restriction of expression and almost never on the proactive improvement of the internal ability to excercise this freedom?

This is not a matter of someone deciding what is good and bad expression, but just an observation that a society of legally free but mentally degraded people is not a very free society in any meaningful sense. I get that it might simply be out of scope for some kinds of libertarianism, but a political philosophy is informed by what a person thinks matters. Why is this question on the effective exercise of liberty almost entirely ignored?

JS Mill talks about the development of individuality, human capability and how society is made richer by the diverse experiments of life. But that this can only be done well when the mental faculties and core human abilities are well developed. This is why he believed a strong education was essential in a healthy liberal society.

Further, I believe today, there are a certain set of issues brought on by new technology that makes threats to the internal ability to exercise freedom of expression more pressing. Just to note a few:

• News and social media driving a habituation of emotional reactivity over thoughtful discussion and evaluation of issues.
• The increasingly concerning trend of people outsourcing critical thinking and the ability to articulate thoughts to LLMs.
• The damage to attention span and ability to concentrate as a result of extended consumption of short form content.

I see these as threats to human creativity, critical thinking and originality - the core ability to effectively exercise free action both at a personal and societal level. Perhaps I’m imagining these issues to be more significant than they are, but issues like them related to poor education, growing mental health issues, the weakening or corrupting of human faculties through unhealthy habits - why are these not at least equally as offensive to a libertarian as outside restriction?

What is the libertarian solution here?

Hi everyone, five months ago, I decided to quit my job and dedicate my life to philosophy. In that time, through my long study and deep reflections, I finally discovered the correct answer to all philosophical questions. I wanted to give you guys the chance to harvest some of the enlightenment from me because I discovered that is the ethical thing to do in my kind of situation - so this is your opportunity to ask me anything.

I’ve been doing some reading on the philosophy of liberty and free expression and there is one question I have become increasingly interested in: Why are libertarian concerns regarding free speech almost exclusively focused on the external restriction of expression and almost never on the proactive improvement of the internal ability to excercise this freedom?

This is not a matter of someone deciding what is good and bad expression, but just an observation that a society of legally free but mentally degraded people is not a very free society in any meaningful sense.

JS Mill talks about the development of individuality, human capability and how society is made richer by the diverse experiments of life. But that this can only be done well when the mental faculties and core human abilities are well developed. This is why he believed a strong education was essential in a healthy liberal society.

Further, I believe today, there are a certain set of issues brought on by new technology that makes threats to the internal ability to exercise freedom of expression more pressing. Just to note a few:

⁠• News and social media driving a habituation of emotional reactivity over thoughtful discussion and evaluation of issues.
• ⁠The increasingly concerning trend of people outsourcing critical thinking and the ability to articulate thoughts to LLMs.
• ⁠The damage to attention span and ability to concentrate as a result of extended consumption of short form content.

I see these as threats to human creativity, critical thinking and originality - the core ability to effectively exercise free action both at a personal and societal level. Perhaps I’m imagining these issues to be more significant than they are, but issues like them related to poor education, growing mental health issues, the weakening or corrupting of human faculties through unhealthy habits - why are these not at least equally as offensive as as outside restriction to someone who values liberty?

I’ve been doing some reading on the philosophy of liberty and free expression and there is one question I have become increasingly interested in: Why are libertarian concerns regarding free speech almost exclusively focused on the external restriction of expression and almost never on the proactive improvement of the internal ability to excercise this freedom?

This is not a matter of someone deciding what is good and bad expression, but just an observation that a society of legally free but mentally degraded people is not a very free society in any meaningful sense.

JS Mill talks about the development of individuality, human capability and how society is made richer by the diverse experiments of life. But that this can only be done well when the mental faculties and core human abilities are well developed. This is why he believed a strong education was essential in a healthy liberal society.

Further, I believe today, there are a certain set of issues brought on by new technology that makes threats to the internal ability to exercise freedom of expression more pressing. Just to note a few:

⁠- News and social media driving a habituation of emotional reactivity over thoughtful discussion and evaluation of issues.
- The increasingly concerning trend of people outsourcing critical thinking and the ability to articulate thoughts to LLMs.
- The damage to attention span and ability to concentrate as a result of extended consumption of short form content.

I see these as threats to human creativity, critical thinking and originality - the core ability to effectively exercise free action both at a personal and societal level. Perhaps I’m imagining these issues to be more significant than they are, but issues like them related to poor education, growing mental health issues, the weakening or corrupting of human faculties through unhealthy habits - why are these not at least equally as offensive to a libertarian as outside restriction?

What is the libertarian solution here?

I’ve been doing some reading on the philosophy of liberty and free expression and there is one question I have become increasingly interested in: Why are libertarian concerns regarding free speech almost exclusively focused on the external restriction of expression and almost never on the proactive improvement of the internal ability to excercise this freedom?

This is not a matter of someone deciding what is good and bad expression, but just an observation that a society of legally free but mentally degraded people is not a very free society in any meaningful sense.

JS Mill talks about the development of individuality, human capability and how society is made richer by the diverse experiments of life. But that this can only be done well when the mental faculties and core human abilities are well developed. This is why he believed a strong education was essential in a healthy liberal society.

Further, I believe today, there are a certain set of issues brought on by new technology that makes threats to the internal ability to exercise freedom of expression more pressing. Just to note a few:

• News and social media driving a habituation of emotional reactivity over thoughtful discussion and evaluation of issues.
• The increasingly concerning trend of people outsourcing critical thinking and the ability to articulate thoughts to LLMs.
• The damage to attention span and ability to concentrate as a result of extended consumption of short form content.

I see these as threats to human creativity, critical thinking and originality - the core ability to effectively exercise free action both at a personal and societal level. Perhaps I’m imagining these issues to be more significant than they are, but issues like them related to poor education, growing mental health issues, the weakening or corrupting of human faculties through unhealthy habits - why are these not at least equally as offensive to a libertarian as outside restriction?

What is the libertarian solution here?

All the philosophers seem to be saying different things. I read several works by Plato and I thought I was making progress. But then I read a couple books by read Nietzsche (beyond good and evil then a little bit of the gay one) and he politely suggested that all that is wrong.

This seems to go on and on and I’ve already invested a significant amount of my time here so I just want to get to the conclusion - which philosopher turned out to be right in the end?