Plato, in The Republic, argues for censorship.
What arts and stories we read is an important influence upon us.
It is important that we only let ourselves be influenced by good and virtuous things that will be a positive influence on us, that will teach us well.
There is only one problem, and Plato knows it.
And that is that 95% of us do not know enough wisdom, or enough about art, to judge what is good and worthy, and there is far more to be lost by banning something good than there is to be gained by protecting us from bad influences.
Which ones among us should decide what to censor?
But there is more to this problem.
Which is this: who will know who should decide what to censor?
In order to know who is wise enough and knowlegeable enough to decide what to censor, we would have to ourselves know what that wisdom and knowledge is.
95% or more of us are not wise or knowledgeable about art enough to do the job.
And only those who are wise and knowledgeable enough to do the job will know who is wise and knowledgeable enough to do the job.
Only the 5% who can do the job will know who can do the job.
The rest of us naturally will have no clue.
So what to do?
Roll the dice, and risk doing more harm than good by censoring the wrong thing?
We are just going to have to be allowed to make our own mistakes.
And recognize that it is important for us to choose ourselves, on our own, to read and be influenced by the right things.
Hopefully, with help from others, we will do a reasonably good job.
And this, I'm sure, is what Plato was really trying to teach.
To teach us to be our own censors for ourselves, as we learn and make our own mistakes.
For us ourselves to expose ourselves to only the good things- or at least to try.
God loves you!
Sincerely,
David S. Annderson