Function of gov ---> Satisfy the genuine wants of the masses ---> can satisfy those wants ---> be informed what are those wants ---> Freedom of the speech ---> indispensable for a healthy state
A. If people do know know what they want, how could they inform the government of what they want ? ---> weaken
B. Freedom of speeches ---> No wants of the masses ---> No Social order
Great concept, by having the freedom of the speeches as the sufficient condition to lead to a healthy state, it also lead to the other necessary condition as the negate of the sufficient condition of leading to one of the negate sufficient condition ( wants of the mess ) not be able to guarantee the indispensable for a healthy state.
Weaken perfectly.
C. If it is true, then we know all of the conditional logic chains could be destroyed here.
D. The other good concept here.
1. Freedom of the speech is actually the necessary condition of " satisfying the wants of the masses " so, being correct that it is not sufficient. Meanwhile, it said that in order to be sufficient it has to be that ( Freedom of speech + Social order ---> satisfying the wants of the masses ).
So, from the original argument we know that ( Satisfying the wants of the masses ---> Freedom of speech ), then we know that D is actually not weakening the original argument but to explain why freedom of speech is necessary to satisfy the wants of the masses ) - Not weaken at all.
E. If they know what people want, they don't need to be informed.