This personality type puts things off until it is too late a…
Questions
This persоnаlity type puts things оff until it is tоo lаte аnd decisions make themselves.
Sоcrаtes wаs put tо deаth in 399 BCE fоr the charge of impiety and corrupting the youth. The irony is that a man identified as an expert on the matter of "piety," Euthyphro, could not offer a clear and cogent definition capable of withstanding Socratic interrogation. The repression of human expression continues in our world. Global Threats to Free Expression In August 2022, the government of Saudi Arabia, an ally of the United States, sentenced one of its citizens, a woman, to 34-years in prison for her social media activity, which included retweeting criticism of the monarchy's abuses of power. In August of 2023, the Kingdom of Jordan, another U.S. ally, passed a law punishing “online speech deemed harmful to national unity…” The legislation criminalizes posts “promoting, instigating, aiding, or inciting immorality,” and those demonstrating “contempt for religion” and “undermining national unity.” In March 2023, the co-founder of Pink Floyd, Roger Waters, was brought under investigation in Germany for "incitement to public hatred because the clothing worn on stage could be used to glorify or justify Nazi rule, thereby disturbing the public peace.” Waters insisted that his performance was mocking fascism, not celebrating it. In 2025, several hundreds in the United Kingdom have been arrested for participating in pro-Palestinian protests connected to a banned organization. In 2026, Iranian citizens participating in mass demonstrations were subjected to widespread government repression. In the United States The First Amendment guarantees everyone in the United States, including non-citizens, freedom of speech. This constitutional guarantee prohibits the government from punishing people for express their views. Some in the government have, nevertheless, attempted to punish individuals for unfavored speech. In spite of these constitutionally-guaranteed liberties, students have been deported from the United States for their speech, as documented by the non-partisan, free-speech advocacy group, FIRE. On September 30, 2025, a Ronald Reagan appointed federal judge ruled the Trump administration violated the First Amendment rights of non-citizens expressing pro-Palestinian views when the government targeted them for deportation over speech the government objected to. In September 2025, a retired police officer was arrested and jailed in Tennessee after posting a meme to Facebook. After public pressure and 37 days of incarceration, the man was freed without charge. He is currently pursuing legal recourse for the violation of his rights. In December 2024, a Lakeland, Florida woman was arrested for saying "Delay, deny, depose. You people are next" at the end of a frustrating phone call with her insurance company, Blue Cross Blue Shield. The words "delay," "deny," and "depose" were written on the ammunition used to killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Boston's speech was interpreted by police to be a "threat to kill or injure...." The charges were later dropped. In January 2026, independent journalists Don Lemon and Georgia Fort were arrested and charged along with activists participating in anti-ICE protest inside a Minnesota church. Before the government secured a grand jury indictment, two different courts refused to grant the government's request for arrest warrants for the journalists. Given Lemon and Fort's role as journalists covering the protest, their arrest has generated concern and criticism from free speech advocates. Firings and Cancellations--Beyond Government Repression First Amendment speech protections do not extend to private domains of public life including social media platforms. The First Amendment also does not protect citizens from being fired from employers who object to our freely expressed beliefs. This piece summarizes research on a range of social media posts that resulted in firing. The authors raise concerns about infringements of privacy but also view some of the firings as acts of accountability, against those with positions of power, and a strategy of addressing social injustice. Efforts have been made to pressure organizations to "disinvite" guest speakers deemed to hold or advocate misguided views. Activists have also made an effort to shout down speakers this disagree with or believe are advocating for harmful ideas, on college campuses. Though it is technically not a violation of our First Amendment rights to be fired from a job for our free and privately expressed opinions or beliefs, such detrimental consequences can have the effect of causing citizens to mute themselves for fear of losing their livelihoods. If freely expressing ourselves will deprive us of the resources needed to feed and house ourselves, many will simply hold our tongues and drop our pens. Instructions Write a dialogue of at least 1,200 words featuring one philosopher and two friends who disagree about whether it was right/wrong for a retail worker to be fired for their social media post--a post which both parties agree is offensive and mistaken. You can choose to either pick a side that wins the exchange, or you can leave things ambiguously as Plato did with Euthyphro. You can describe the details of the offensive and mistaken social media post, or you can leave the post to your readers imagination. In either case be sure to focus on the broader question of principles pertaining to freedom of expression. Grading Criteria (15 points total) Opening (1 pts): Creative, engaging opening that draws the reader into the philosophical discussion. Philosophical Question (2 pts): The chosen question (right, real, true, or free will) is clearly articulated and genuinely explored. Accurate Treatment of Thinkers & Character (5 pts): Each philosopher's position is accurately rendered in spirit. The film character's perspective is authentically drawn from specific details in the film. All three voices are distinct. Creative Dialogue (3 pts): Genuinely conversational, not a lecture with line breaks. Characters interrupt, question, clarify, joke. The exchange has energy and rhythm. Intentional Conclusion (2 pts): The conclusion conveys intentionality, whether a stalemate, a new conclusion steered by the author, or a refined question. Philosophy is an ongoing discussion, and your ending should reflect that you have made a conscious choice about where this conversation lands. Enjoyable Writing (2 pts): Warm, clear, clever, and creative. A pleasure to read. Humor and voice emerge naturally from the characters and situation. Preparation: Notecards During the proctored writing session, you may refer to two handwritten notecards. These are the only materials you may bring. Your notecards may include: Key quotes from philosophers Brief outlines or bullet points Key terms or questions you want to explore Prepare your notecards thoughtfully. They will be checked during the proctoring setup. Note on Accuracy & Notecard Use You are not expected to have memorized each thinker or character's ideas. You will be evaluated on your knowledge of the spirit of their positions. Your notecards are there to support you. Use them to recall key quotes or concepts. But do not allow them to interfere with your creative intellectual flow. Note that you are not being asked to recall each philosopher's exact words. You are expected to take creative leeway in representing the their thinking and views; however, you must accurately render their core commitments. The one exception: as the thinkers engage in Socratic dialogue, you may have them arrive at a compromise or even admit error in discussion with the other thinker. Such a resolution is not necessary. Philosophy is, after all, an ongoing discussion.