Part 1
1. Why does Mill say it is important to consider two different "branches" of argument regarding the suppression of an opinion?
2. What does Mill say is "assumed" by the person who wishes to suppress an opinion because they are sure it is false?
3. Why does Mill say that learning through experience is not enough?
4. Why does Mill support freedom of expression of even a false idea?
5. What is Mill's point in criticizing the Christians of his day? Do you think that criticism (or something like it) is still accurate?
6. Many people support freedom of speech as long as the conversation remains polite or civil. Mill opposes using this as a restriction ("temperate" is his word). What is his argument? Do you think he has a good point?
Part 2
1. What does Brison assert about how the debate over pornography has changed?
2. Is Brison's challenge against a moral or a legal right to pornography? Explain.
3. How does Brison define "pornography?" Does she intend this definition to be an accurate description of all that is commonly called pornography?
4. What is Brison's example of Evelina Giobbe intended to show?
5. What does Brison assert are the detrimental consequences of the widespread availability of pornography? Does she make a good case that these effects are in fact caused by pornography? If so, what are her most compelling reasons? If not, what are her least compelling reasons?
6. Brison reviews several theories about the basis of rights. Do any of them correspond with what you think about rights? Explain.
7. What is the difference between positive and negative rights according to Brison? Why is this important to her discussion?
8. Consider your answers to the series of rhetorical questions she asks about the nature of a right to pornography (regarding the example of the 21 year old son). Which do you think should be answered affirmatively or negatively?
9. What is Brison's example of the German "snuff" film intended to show?
10. On what grounds does Brison challenge Altman's claims of a right to pornography? After reading Altman's article, do you find her criticisms compelling?