J'S' Mill

1
J.S. Mill

• On Liberty 2

2

• We saw that Mills Harm Principle is based on
  the idea that our actions can be more or less
  clearly divided into those which affect only
  ourselves and those which affect other people.
• In the former case, according to Mill, we should
  have total freedom, while in the latter case we
  should be prevented from endangering, or harming,
  others.

3

• In order to make this kind of distinction the
  basis for a political philosophy, Mill has to
  clearly state the difference between these two
  domains
• the domain of private self-concerning action
  and the domain of public other-affecting action.
  He approaches this task by sketching the
  essential features of the private domain.

4

• The appropriate region of human liberty
  consists of THREE domains. Mill admits that these
  are not exclusively self-regarding, but says that
  they are primarily self-regarding and that they
  generally only affect others with their consent.

5

• Firstly the inward domain of consciousness (free
  thought, opinion, expression, conscience).
• This area of freedom must be defended why?

6

• The Freedom of Opinion and Speech argument
• Human knowledge is always partial, incomplete,
  so disagreement and debate is the best way to
  arrive at the truth hence freedom of thought is
  a utility (not a universal Right).

7

• If all mankind minus one were of one opinion,
  and only one person were of the contrary opinion,
  mankind would be no more justified in silencing
  that one person, than he, if he had the power,
  would be justified in silencing mankind. (p.85)
• The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of
  an opinion is, that it is robbing the human
  race.

8

• Why?
• If the opinion is right, they are deprived of
  the opportunity of exchanging error for truth if
  wrong, they lose what is almost as great a
  benefit, the clearer perception and livelier
  impression of truth, produced by its collision
  with error. (p.85)

9
Second Domain of Freedom

• The way that we frame the plan of our life (our
  tastes, pursuits, interests, career).
• See the summary at beginning of Ch.3 (not
  included in extract)
• experiments in living are as essential as
  experiments in thought. It is now suggested that
  individuality is one of the principal
  ingredients of human happiness, and quite the
  chief ingredient of individual and social
  progress (ibid.). He appeals to spontaneity
  and originality.

10

• Third Domain of Freedom our association with
  other individuals (our right to combine,
  organise). No society which does not protect
  these freedoms, according to Mill, could be
  called free.

11

• But what is an individual for Mill?
• Mill bases his entire political philosophy on
  some notion of the individual but what is an
  individual?
• We should note that he doesnt say person, or
  citizen, or subject he says individual.
• Why?

12

• For Mill, the person, the citizen, the subject is
  not just a human being, they must be an
  individual.
• That is, if they are to fulfill their potential
  as a human being they must be an individual human
  being.
• How does a human being become an individual?
  There are two possible answers to this question.

13

• The first answer, would be to say that for Mill
  we are always already individuals our
  individuality is a given which society must
  recognise and respect. This would be rather like
  the assumption that Locke, and other social
  contract theorists make that it is possible to
  isolate a pre-social individual from society.
• In this case, we would see social power as a
  negative force which conflicts with the
  individuality of the members of society.
• In Mills use of the opposition between
  individual and society it is clear that, at least
  some of the time he has this view of
  individual.

14

• The second answer to the question would be to say
  that human beings only become individuals under
  certain social conditions. In other words, being
  a human being does not automatically make one an
  individual.
• According to this view, individuality is not
  given to us by nature, it is a potentiality which
  may or may not be developed by people in
  particular social settings.

15

• In other words, it is possible to imagine a
  society in which people are to a great extent
  not individuals.
• And, in fact, the examples which Mill gives of
  such societies are firstly the unnamed barbarian
  societies and secondly, the societies of Asia
  in particular China which he sees as enforcing
  too high a degree of social conformism on its
  members.

16

• There is, however, a tension in Mills account
  between the classical liberal assumption that the
  individual precedes society and his recognition
  that, to a large extent, the individual is made
  in society.
• The difference here is between the view that
  individuals are basically all the same they are
  influenced by their society, but their basic
  human individuality is independent of society.
• On this liberal view, all human beings, in all
  societies have certain fundamental needs which
  can only be satisfied through a liberal politics.

17

• There is a difference between this view and the
  view that particular societies produce the kind
  of individuals which best suit that society. On
  the face of it, this is a very illiberal
  assumption liberals would normally not accept
  this view.
• However, Mill is more complex than that he seems
  to acknowledge the role of society in producing
  individuals of a certain type.

18

• For example, speaking about the means of
  persuasion which society can use in relation to
  children he says
• Society has had absolute power over them during
  all the early portion of their existenceThe
  existing generation is master both of the
  training and the entire circumstances of the
  generation to come (p.91).

19

• Presumably this absolute power is capable of
  producing certain kinds of individual
• Again, in the emphasis he places on the
  importance of the development of the individual,
  and the role of society in this development, Mill
  also leaves open the possibility that the
  individual is not a natural, but a cultural
  construction. In other words, there seems to be
  less reason to accept that the individual is
  socially and historically constant.

20

• Summary
• Mill provides the classic western defence of
  certain basic political freedoms but he does so
  on the basis of Utility, not human rights.
• Like other modern liberal political philosophies
  the issue of the relation between society and
  individual is of central importance. AND the
  issue of defining what exactly an individual is
  (when considered independently of society) is a
  central problem, which is never fully resolved.

21

• Next time well look at a very different modern
  western approach to politics Marxism.