anotherlongshot (anotherlongshot) wrote,


I have finally gotten a sense of where I'm going with my Jurisprudence essay and what the argument is. I note with interest that both 8,000 words are essentially about freedom: one is about liberty in general, and this one is about the freedom of speech and expression which, obviously, I will defend to the death against ridiculous religious zealotry.

Also, Habermas' conception of the public sphere is extremely elitist - which explains why I will be defending it in my essay. It makes perfect sense to me: how can a person engage in rational-critical discourse if that person isn't clever? Right? Right?!

Tags: llm, philosophy, via ljapp
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.