Talk:Freedom versus license

Philosophy: Ethics / Social and political Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics
	Social and political philosophy

Constraint

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Currently this entry misses the classical opposition of freedom and license. The philosopher John Locke, for example, felt that freedom necessarily entailed some constraint and acceptance of responsibility or else it could injure society and individuals. Such freedom without limits turned into "license." Freedom of speech is an easy example of the possibilities of liberties becoming licenses. Free speech without limits can provoke danger (e.g., yelling "fire" in a crowded theater) or advocate violence or inflict symbolic injuries by libelous statements.

See https://blog.oup.com/2009/03/free_speech/ Kaplanovitchskyite (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:27, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply