A Response to CorrespondenceThe founding fathers of the United States fought for freedom and today we continue to maintain that freedom. We fight fiercely to protect, amend and interpret the Constitution, Bill of Rights and Amendments. So when Yale's Intercultural Affairs Committee sent an email last fall imploring students to think about the implications of their Halloween costumes and reevaluate their decision to wear them, Professor Erika Christakis responded with a email defending students' right to make their own choices. This story made national news and sparked discussions about cultural appropriation as well as inclusiveness, racism, to name a few. This topic has been widely debated because it is a topic that is close to every American's heart: our inalienable human rights. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essayThis essay aims to include John Stuart Mill in the discourse surrounding this event. Even if Mill would condone the emailing, he would likely question the authority of the Intercultural Affairs Committee. In terms of policy, Mill would say that if the school could prove that it was harmful, then it could implement a set of enforceable policies regarding costumes. Millian's arguments against the concerns put forward by the task force are weak. The two emails themselves simply express the opinions and concerns of both parties. Mill would argue for individual autonomy because freedom of speech is a principle valued by the government under which the university resides. The ultimate authority of the state decided that free speech would maximize its utility and Mill agrees with this. To immerse Mill in this situation, it is necessary to consider one of his fundamental principles. Mill's principle of liberty is essential to understanding why he would support dialogue between the committee and the professor. It emphasizes that freedom of speech and opinion encourages truth, understanding of truth and the true meaning of truth. According to Mill (59), maximum competition of ideas creates a better society. “If all humanity minus one were of one opinion, and one person were of a contrary opinion, humanity would be no more justified in silencing that person than he would be, if he had the power, would not be justified in silencing humanity (59).” It's basically a good thing that the university and the professor have spoken out on the topic of Halloween costumes. Towards the end of the second chapter of Mill's On Liberty, he discusses the struggle to put limits on fair debate. He supports pushing these boundaries but mentions that the way an opinion is presented could lead to censorship (60). This means that while the opinion may be valid, the way in which it is expressed has a huge impact on one's intentions. Christakis' email response to the university discusses her appreciation of other cultures, including that she obtained a sari on a trip to Bangladesh. She says she never wore it once. This is somewhat of a flaw in this argument. Mill might say that some limitations on free speech are acceptable. It could be argued that one can appreciate a culture just as much by talking or writing about it as by dressing in potentially offensive outfits. Of course, this is not really the point of the two emails, but Mill would have more to say on this point and on the..