In the Declaration of Independence, the founding fathers established that a “decent respect to the opinions of mankind,” compelled them to declare their reasons for separating themselves from Great Britain. By building on the ideas of Enlightenment philosophers, they eventually constructed an adaptive society which can change freely to meet the needs of its people. The driving force behind America’s constant adjustment is civil discourse. While the concept of “civil discourse,” was never explicitly defined by the great Enlightenment philosophers, it exemplifies many, if not all, of the values they discussed. Civil discourse upholds core Enlightenment ideals by generating respect for ideas and fully utilizing freedom of speech.
By serving as a diplomatic form of disagreement, civil discourse inherently supports respect. According to the Ohio State University Center for Ethics and Human Values, “Civil discourse is the practice of deliberating about matters of public concern with others in a way that seeks to expand knowledge and understanding,” (“What Is Civil”). If a person believes that an idea is clearly wrong, that person has no logical reason to continue exploring and gaining deeper knowledge of that “wrong,” view. So, if “matters of public concern,” are being debated, there must be some form of respect for those matters which leads people to debate them. Therefore, conscious expansion of “knowledge and understanding,” cannot happen without some kind of acceptance and respect for opposing viewpoints to one’s own. Additionally, in order to discuss matters, the people involved in a discussion must have some desire to speak with each other. This willingness to discuss meaningful, often difficult, topics fosters respect for all members of such discussions. By naturally requiring respect for people and ideas, civil discourse supports the belief that mankind should be respected.
Of course, in a democratic society, every respected individual has the rights to freedom of speech and freedom of expression. In civil discourse, these freedoms are taken to their fullest extent. In Aeropagitica, John Milton wrote, “Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties,” (Milton John). In civil discourse, people are encouraged to “utter freely,” the truths they believe in. If the right to argue about beliefs is not honored, then true civil discourse has not been reached. Spinoza’s Theological‐Political Treatise states that, “Tyranny is most violent where individual beliefs, which are an inalienable right, are regarded as criminal,” (De Spinoza, Benedict). Individual beliefs are not only supported by civil discourse, but they are also necessary for civil discourse to occur. If only a selective group of beliefs were recognized, a full understanding of public matters would never be attained. Furthermore, John Locke describes mankind’s natural state as, “A state also of equality, … no one having more than another, there being nothing more evident than that creatures of the same species and rank… should also be equal amongst one another, without subordination or subjection,” (Locke, John). In other words, Locke claimed that all people are naturally equal to each other, and no person should be subjected to the will of another. In civil discourse, these values of equality are upheld. In a discussion where people seek to “expand knowledge and understanding,” no one’s opinions can be held as more valuable than another person’s opinions. If one person or group’s opinions were unjustly put above another’s, then the discussion would not be furthering knowledge or understanding. Conversely, it would be skewing or indoctrinating the discussion members’ perception of an issue by providing information that does not accurately reflect the different beliefs regarding the topic. By establishing the freedoms of speech and expression as core values, civil discourse promotes a truly free society.
Unfortunately, where any use of free will is permitted, opportunities for abuse of that will are present. As Montesquieu observes in The Spirit of the Laws, “Constant experience shows us that every man invested with power is apt to abuse it, and to carry his authority as far as it will go,” (Montesquieu, Charles). The ability to speak freely is an enormous power. The power of free speech, when used in civil discourse, is a tool that has the ability to change the world‐ for better or for worse. Civil discourse may result in violent or tense conflicts, especially when matters of public concern are controversial. It also may result in people having inaccurate views of reality, as some speakers involved in civil discourse might not speak the full truth. Despite these risks, civil discourse is one of the most necessary forces of change in a democratic society. Civil discourse allows people to openly present their opinions before others, giving everyone involved in the discussion an overall more accurate, inclusive view of the varying opinions of society members. It also fosters change in a peaceful way by promoting discussion as a way to influence leaders. Although civil discourse has obvious risks, its potential to improve society is far too great to be ignored.
Works Cited
De Spinoza, Benedict. Theological‐Political Treatise. Edited by Jonathan Israel, translated by Michael Silverthorne and Jonathan Israel. Cambridge University Press, 2007 (originally published 1670). Cambridge Archives,
https://fenix.iseg.ulisboa.pt/downloadFile/1126033050836487/Spinoza,%20Jonathan%20 Israel,%20Michael%20Silverthorne%20-%20Spinoza_%20TheologicalPolitical%20Treatise%20(2007,%20Cambridge%20University%20Press).pdf.
“Declaration of Independence: A Transcription.” National Archives, US National Archives and Records Administration, www.archives.gov/founding-docs/declaration-transcript.
Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government. 1689. Early Modern Texts, www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/locke1689a.pdf.
Milton, John. Aeropagitica; A Speech of Mr. John Milton for the Liberty of Unlicenc’d Printing, to the Parlament of England, 1644. Pamphlet.
Montesquieu, Charles. “The Spirit of the Laws.” 1748, Montesquieu, Charles. “The Spirit of the Laws.” 1748, https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-documentlibrary/detail/montesquieuthe-spirit-of-the-laws-1748.
“What Is Civil Discourse?” The Ohio State University Center for Ethics and Human Values, cehv.osu.edu/civil-discourse-citizenship‑0/what-civil-discourse.
