By reviewing Plato's and Mill's arguments for and against censorship, I arrive at my conclusion which is faithful to Mill. I couldn't have said it better than Mill's two main arguments against censorship. Humans make mistakes and making mistakes is completely inevitable because we are not perfect. Therefore, without being perfect, how can a human, like Plato, decide the perfect way to form a society? Plato makes sense in that he doesn't care about happiness, he only cares about an ideal state with few or no problems. I understand that this was his goal in forming the Republic, but in my opinion, Plato leaves no room for growth. In his society, everything will be the same for generations and generations. His society is very well structured and extremely thoughtful, but it essentially has to be to thrive for many years, because the workers only work, the guards only guard, and the rulers only rule. Only what leaders do, say or think is important and they too are just as human as those they lead. My question to Plato is simply why? Why do leaders, philosophers, those ...