Should art ever be banned or censored if its content and/or effects on audiences are deemed seriously offensive or harmful? Begin by exploring the arguments for banning or censoring art. One place to start would be Plato's argument in The Republic, but you are not limited to this perspective. You should consider what kinds of effects art would produce on people that could plausibly, or not
plausibly, be construed as offensive or harmful. Why would these serious effects require that "bad" art be censored or banned? After exploring this viewpoint, develop a counterargument against banning and censorship. This argument should address the issue of whether even obviously offensive and harmful art should be permitted and why. What makes the production, display, and appreciation of "bad" art permissible, despite its being bad? Throughout, focus on specific forms of art, such as paintings, plays, movies, and music.
What will be an ideal response?
This is an argumentative essay on censorship, probably departing from Plato's famous theory but not limited to that approach.
You might also like to view...
Which of the following is not a form of the mind-body problem?
A. How do minds and bodies causally interact? B. What is the special relationship between my mind and my body? C. How can minds know anything about bodies? D. Do I exist as a thinking thing? E. All of the above are forms of the mind-body problem.
For indigenous people, the term place has more than geographical significance. It is also significant because it:
A) ?is a matter of personal identity. B) ?is a marker of wealth. C) ?designates one's status in society. D) ?indicates the strength of a tribe's population.
The following terms are conclusion indicators: ________
a. consequently b. thus c. hence d. All of these choices.
According to Bentham, "pleasurable" means the same as "good."
Indicate whether the statement is true or false.