Document Type : Research Article
Authors
1 .ph
2 . Department of Public law, Faculty of Law and Political Science , University of Allameh Tabataba'i Tehran, Iran
Abstract
This research aims to identify the conceptual boundaries of “hate speech.” The main issue is the theoretical and normative ambiguity in determining the limits of freedom of expression against harmful errors; in such a way that the current broad definitions classify all forms of unpleasant speech as hate speech and therefore do not leave a coherent framework for legal and moral policymaking. The aim of the empirical research is to compare the incorrectness of hate speech from the perspective of the philosophy of language and the ethics of speech, and to present general criteria for distinguishing illegal speech from permissible speech. The research is also theoretically based on the theory of speech act and the principle of respect for the truth. The findings show that hate speech, due to its inherent violation of the principle of equal value and human dignity, is morally wrong and outside the realm of freedom of expression, even without causing objective or psychological harm. In contrast, offensive speech . The result is that the criterion for the legitimacy of speech is not the speaker's intention, but rather its relationship to the dignity and equality of human beings.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)