John Stuart Mill Free Speech Analysis

Great Essays
Mill’s’ essay also argues that freedom of speech and diversifying opinions act as a fuel that drives social progress. Mill states, “... the only unfailing and permanent source of improvement is liberty, since by it there are as many possible independent centres of improvement as there are individuals” (Mill 65). One can gather that Mill believes that liberty is necessary for improvement and the more liberty present in individual members of society the more persons influencing change. This is an important message for our society to receive and is in accordance with our liberal democratic society. It demonstrates the importance of individuals and how their freedoms positively contribute to society because, as Mill bluntly states, without individuality …show more content…
Mill contends that opinions should not be expressed if this is done to cause mischief and that they are permissible to be expressed if they do not. He argues that it is justifiable that a man expresses a negative opinion towards the ownership of private property or states that merchants are the reason for poverty (Mill 52). Although controversial in nature, such opinions are not harming anyone and for this reason, should have the ability to circulate. However, the opinion is only justifiable in certain instances where the context of the situation affirms it is not inflicting harm on another individual or a group (Mill 16). To illustrate this point, Mill refers to a scenario in which the same opinion is expressed by a group of people which could lead to dangerous circumstances (e.g. mob outside of corn-dealers house). This opinion incites rage in them and evidently they might act violently to others (e.g. towards the corn dealer) (Mill 52). In these situations, is important to recognize that it is not the entirety of the opinion that one must pay attention to, but the context in which the opinion is shared. For the benefit of all Mill’s writes, “the liberty of the individual must thus far be limited; he must not make himself a nuisance to other people. But if he refrains from molesting others in what concerns them, …show more content…
Mill’s work goes into depth on how much liberty should be granted to the individual and to what extent the government should be able to intervene with these liberties for the betterment of society. I agree with Mill on what the basic tenets for his argument on freedom of speech are (i.e. truth, utility, social progress). I also accept that the justification of freedom of speech as that which can bring about such things as truth and social progress. He provides a clear explanation for society as to why it is important to allow others to state their opinions and not infringe upon the free speech of others. It seems clear that acting in accordance to this precept will lead to the overall betterment of society. As previously stated, I believe that modeling a similar stance to Mill on freedom of speech has served to benefit our modern liberal democratic society. This is shown through our ability to freely discuss our opinion within reasonable limits, listen and learn from opinions that differ from our own, and our being free from the rules of a particular religion and being able to safely practice (or not to practice) any religion of our choosing. The ability for all persons to share their opinions and discuss them with others is the reason for our societal progression technologically and in the area of tolerance. I believe that it was

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    First the citizens must give themselves up to the law of the society, they must allow restrictions and limits to be placed upon them for the society to run effectively. Secondly the citizens must put themselves under the protection of the society and trust that they will be defended and taken care of. When this trust is given to the society and the government then they can effectively protect and ensure “the peace, safety, and public good of the people. This is contrary to what Mill would argue as he does not believe citizens should submit themselves to society and give away their rights. He believes that as an individual citizen you should fight for your opinion and never give into society.…

    • 1161 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Since the constitution of the United Stats of America was written in 1787 it has long since been a topic of conversation as well as confrontation among politicians and political theorists alike. The ideals of James Madison and John Dewey regarding constitutional reform and democracy are just another example of this. These two men, both extremely influential in their own way, have conflicting views of liberty, democracy and largely the revision of the constitution and its consequences or lack there of. James Madison, Father of the U.S. Constitution, believed that constitutional revision should be infrequent. While John Dewey argues for change, while not specifically on constitutional revision but rather for “effective liberty” for the state of democracy as a whole, which ultimately relates to that of constitutional revision.…

    • 1344 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the late 1930s and early 1940s an ever growing America had many different visions for the future. President Roosevelt along with Norman Rockwell are two notable American icons that had similar but contrasting views on the image of America. In Roosevelt’s Quarantine speech he talks about how America wants peace and how the nations are declaring war on each other, even when some nations did not want anything to do with World War II. Roosevelt states “America hates war. America hopes for peace.…

    • 1263 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Native Americans and Their Fight for Simplicity The earliest accounts of Native Americans expressed a civilization with a great sense of community. A civilization that was based on essentials, treasuring items that only improved their well-being. A civilization far from excessive, doing only enough to provide for themselves.…

    • 1247 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    He argues that individuals cannot cause harm to others in society and they must give back to society and so if an individual does not fulfill these responsibilities the government can intervene. Mill believes in a public sphere where the actions of an individual impact other members of society as well as a private sphere where the actions of an individual only impact themselves. Actions can be positive or negative depending on how they impact other individual’s happiness and satisfaction. An individual is free to commit positive or negative actions in his private sphere as he is not impacting the overall happiness of society. However, in the public sphere, an individual must consider the impact of his actions on the rest of the individuals in society and therefore he can only commit actions that do not cause harm.…

    • 1434 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    1. What are the Alien and Sedition Acts? Alien act is the act of not being able to import or accept those who are not from the nation as it can be dangerous and Sedition Acts is that if anyone was to write, say or print anything man-made lie against anyone in high office government wise to make them look bad. 2.…

    • 550 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Explain one of the four reasons Mill gives for why we should have complete freedom of speech. Evaluate the reason you gave – is Mill right? Use examples. The Argument from Partial Truth-…

    • 799 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Canada is widely known and thought of as being a democratic county where freedom of speech is naturally given to everyone. However, during situations of opposing views and national conflicts, a very common question rises – are Canadian citizens actually free to speak without limitations? In On Liberty, John Stuart Mill explores the limitations and regulations on freedom of speech and formulates a theory that the intervention of government would result in degeneration of freedom of speech for citizens. However, in the situation in the episode of ‘The Agenda’, his theory gets challenged due to its ineffectiveness.…

    • 1908 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Tyranny In Tocqueville

    • 1239 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Like Tocqueville, Mill was also concerned about the tyranny that a majority can form. But unlike the others, his concern was not just limited to the wrong exercise of the power by law makers over minorities but he was also apprehensive about the prevailing social opinion of the majority class over minority. In his view, the second type of tyranny is even more dangerous than first one. This is because exercising of power by majority in society or wrong use of power by them is usually upheld by extreme penalties. On the other hand, social opinions of the majority is considered a little more acceptable in society and it is sometimes considered as freedom of expression but in reality this type of tyranny is much more deep rooted in…

    • 1239 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Many individuals believe liberty is tied to democracy, and political choice is extremely important to Mill. Mill believes that the best form of government is Representative Government. In Representative Government, an individual has the ability to protect himself and his views. As Mill says, “Let a person have nothing to do for his country, and he will not care for it.” Meaning that if you do not let an individual have a choice, then he will have no motivation to be productive for society as a whole.…

    • 2226 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    He states, “In all such cases there should be personal freedom, legal and social, to do the action and stand the consequences” (Mill, 64). But, in defining freedom, as expressed earlier,…

    • 1838 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    English philosopher, political economist, and liberal John Stuart Mill published one of his most famous works in 1859: On Liberty. Mill explores the innate and given liberties of people, analyzing what is the extent in which society or government has valid reasons to exercise power over its people. He argues that the individual should not be under the jurisdiction of society or government if their actions are not harming anyone but themselves. The only time society or government should involve themselves and exert power over citizens is if the actions of the individual are harming others within the society.…

    • 812 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    It is out of the power of Mill’s ethical claim to capture whether or not the consequences of certain actions are to be acknowledged as good or bad. Solely centralizing on the power of an action’s outcomes is merely not enough to classify the act as just or unjust. Rather, by recognizing the importance of an action’s principle, or reason to determine its true moral worth; and therefore neglecting the ethics behind John Stuart Mill. Work…

    • 1398 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Mills argues, “[i]f all mankind minus one were of one 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.” His justification of this is the belief that the loss of diversity in thought amongst society would deprive them of enrichment in knowledge. Mill believes freedom of speech should only be limited when harming others. In his famous corn dealer example (2002, pp. 46-47) he explains that individuals should be permitted to say as they wish without any restrictions as long as they do not harm others however, taking offence is understandable.…

    • 1624 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mill Vs Rousseau Analysis

    • 1418 Words
    • 6 Pages

    John Stuart Mill the liberal and Jean-Jacques Rousseau the republican, are two political philosophers whom focussed on the integration of political liberty with the relationship found between that of the individual, society and the state by the means of power or authority. Both of these political thinkers formed their arguments in their writings, namely; On Liberty (1859) by Mill, and The Social Contract (1913) by Rousseau. On a more specific scale, their views differed in much contrast, whereby Rousseau claims that people and individuals of society may only acquire the entity of freedom through a transitioning process from the natural state to the civil state, whereby they would have to conform to the general will as the common good. On the…

    • 1418 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays