Examining Plato and Mill's arguments for and against censorship, I come to my conclusion which is true of 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 being, like Plato, decide the perfect way to form a society? Plato makes sense in that he is not interested in happiness, he is only interested in an ideal state with little or no problems. I understand that that was his goal in forming the Republic, but as I see it 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 thought out, but it essentially has to be to thrive for many years because workers only work, guardians only supervise, and rulers only rule. Only what rulers do, say or think matters and they too are as human as those they lead. My question to Plato is simply: why? Because the rulers, the philosophers, those ...