{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017584994138335287, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.46969696969697, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Standing At The Crossroads: Social Science, Human Agency And Free Speech Law

The disjunction between First Amendment free speech thought, in which the human self is conceived as rational and autonomous, and empirical social scientific notions of human thought and action, which tend toward a more causally deterministic view, poses great difficulties. After examining several recent court cases that confront this theoretical disjunction, this article analyzes the conflicting First Amendment standards that may apply in such cases, including the incitement test enunciated in Brandenburg v. Ohio and First Amendment strict scrutiny. Next, the article analyzes a variety of philosophical positions on the issue of human free will. Finally, it identifies and discusses a number of key questions in the debate and offers suggestions for further research.