Review by Choice Review
The author (philosophy, Univ. of Groningen) is interested in the uses made of philosophical ideas and principles for political or ideological doctrine. Here he explores the ways in which empiricist and rationalist/dualist ideas helped articulate, defend, and attack the principle of free speech. He argues that the philosophical foundation of the absolutist doctrine of free speech in the First Amendment to the US Constitution can be traced to Bayle's 17th-century writing on freedom of conscience and on his Cartesian dualism between mind and body and between talk and action. Cartesian philosophy contains a theory of human nature on which the case for free speech can be founded. The rejection of Cartesian dualism helped lead to the undermining of the case for absolutist freedom of speech, especially if speech is seen as a form of action. The author pursues this theme in discussion of loyalty oaths, hate literature, deconstructionism and free speech on campus, political correctness, sensitivity regulations, and group libel. The theme is interesting, but the writing would benefit from more clarity and from a less polemical style since the author's own political positions intrude too frequently. The book cannot be recommended for students. M. Curtis; Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.
Review by Choice Review
