James Mill, a Scotsman, had been educated at Edinburgh University—taught by, amongst others, Dugald Stewart—and had moved to London inwhere he was to become a friend and prominent ally of Jeremy Bentham and the Philosophical Radicals.
As the ideas developed, the essay was expanded, rewritten and "sedulously" corrected by Mill and his wife, Harriet Taylor. Mill states that On Liberty "was more directly and literally our joint production than anything else which bears my name. He divides this control of authority into two mechanisms: Mill admits that this new form of society seemed immune to tyranny because "there was no fear of tyrannizing over self.
First, even in democracy, the rulers were not always the same sort of people as the ruled. Where one can be protected from a tyrant, it is much harder to be protected "against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling.
On a particular issue, people will align themselves either for or against that issue; the side of greatest volume will prevail, but is not necessarily correct. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.
His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant Over himself, over his body and mind, the individual is sovereign.
For example, according to Mill, children and "barbarian" nations are benefited by limited freedom. Mill concludes the Introduction by discussing what he claimed were the three basic liberties in order of importance: This includes the freedom to act on such thought, i.
Mill attempts to prove his claim from the first chapter that opinions ought never to be suppressed. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility. Secondly, though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth; and since the general or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied.
Thirdly, even if the received opinion be not only true, but the whole truth; unless it is suffered to be, and actually is, vigorously and earnestly contested, it will, by most of those who receive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds.
And not only this, but, fourthly, the meaning of the doctrine itself will be in danger of being lost, or enfeebled, and deprived of its vital effect on the character and conduct: Therefore, Mill concludes that suppression of opinion based on belief in infallible doctrine is dangerous.
Mill points out the inherent value of individuality since individuality is ex vi termini i. He states that he fears that Western civilization approaches this well-intentioned conformity to praiseworthy maxims characterized by the Chinese civilization.
Rather, the person behind the action and the action together are valuable. Among the works of man, which human life is rightly employed in perfecting and beautifying, the first in importance surely is man himself. Supposing it were possible to get houses built, corn grown, battles fought, causes tried, and even churches erected and prayers said, by machinery—by automatons in human form—it would be a considerable loss to exchange for these automatons even the men and women who at present inhabit the more civilised parts of the world, and who assuredly are but starved specimens of what nature can and will produce.
Human nature is not a machine to be built after a model, and set to do exactly the work prescribed for it, but a tree, which requires to grow and develop itself on all sides, according to the tendency of the inward forces which make it a living thing. Mill explains a system in which a person can discern what aspects of life should be governed by the individual and which by society.
Rather, he argues that this liberal system will bring people to the good more effectively than physical or emotional coercion. Governments, he claims, should only punish a person for neglecting to fulfill a duty to others or causing harm to othersnot the vice that brought about the neglect.
Mill spends the rest of the chapter responding to objections to his maxim.John Locke believed you are the owner of your own benjaminpohle.com I was 15 he was my favorite thinker, I read him and was amazed by his clarity. He was known as the father of liberalism.
Mill Locke on Liberty This Essay Mill Locke on Liberty and other 64,+ term papers, college essay examples and free essays are available now on benjaminpohle.com Autor: review • December 23, • Essay • 1, Words (5 Pages) • Views.
John Locke (b. , d. ) was a British philosopher, Oxford academic and medical researcher. Locke’s monumental An Essay Concerning Human Understanding () is one of the first great defenses of modern empiricism and concerns itself with determining the limits of human understanding in respect to a wide spectrum of topics.
It thus tells us in some detail what one can legitimately claim. Discussed and debated from time immemorial, the concept of personal liberty went without codification until the publication of On benjaminpohle.com Stuart Mill's complete and resolute dedication to the cause of freedom inspired this treatise, an enduring work through .
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTORY.
THE subject of this Essay is not the so-called Liberty of the Will, so unfortunately opposed to the misnamed doctrine of Philosophical Necessity; but Civil, or Social Liberty: the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual.
A question seldom stated, and hardly ever discussed, in general terms, but which profoundly. On Liberty is a philosophical work by the English philosopher John Stuart Mill, originally intended as a short benjaminpohle.com work, published in , applies Mill's ethical system of utilitarianism to society and the state.
Mill attempts to establish standards for the relationship between authority and benjaminpohle.com emphasizes the importance of individuality, which he conceived as a prerequisite to.