Article Text
Abstract
This paper is primarily about the personal and public responsibilities of ethics and of ethicists in speaking, writing and commenting publicly about issues of ethical, political and social significance. The paper argues that any such interventions are ‘willy-nilly’, actually or potentially, in the public domain in ways that make any self-conscious decision about intended publics or audiences problematic. In it is argued that a famous, and hitherto useful, distinction relating to the ethical limitations on freedom of speech which we owe to John Stuart Mill may, because of the emergence of ‘the cloud’ have become redundant or inoperable.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Request Permissions
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Copyright information:
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- What should be done about smoking in movies?
- In defence of academic freedom: bioethics journals under siege
- Professional responsibilities of biomedical scientists in public discourse
- Why sex selection should be legal
- Response to Sheehan et al’s ‘In defence of governance: ethics review and social research’
- Infanticide, moral status and moral reasons: the importance of context
- Embryonic stem cell research is not dehumanising us
- In defence of governance: ethics review and social research
- If it ducks like a quack: balancing physician freedom of expression and the public interest
- Should spreading anti-vaccine misinformation be criminalised?