Philosophers have long argued about the correct way to organize a group of people to maximize safety, happiness, and order. John Stuart Mill and Plato, two prominent philosophers of their respective eras, created contradicting theories on how best to create a flourishing society. Although their theories are different, Mill and Plato both focus on the roles of people in society. Mill specifically believes that people should act in ways that promote self-benefit while avoiding harming another person (2002, p. 8). Moreover, if a person causes “harm” to another person, society may step in and dole out punishment as it sees fit (2002, p. 10). These two principles together construct Mill’s harm principle. Plato, however, believes an individual
…show more content…
Plato answers this question by deducing that children be taught false stories containing small truths (377a). The only flaw in Plato’s reasoning comes from the fact that he does not elaborate on why he specifically chooses to teach kids stories instead of facts and lies instead of full truths. In order to figure out what Mill’s ideal mode of teaching would be and whether his lessons would contain more facts than lies, one must look at how Mill would respond to Plato’s mode of teaching. A cornerstone of Mill’s theory hinges on the “liberty of conscience” which he describes as “[the] absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects, practical or speculative, scientific, moral, or theological” (2002, p.10). For now, the focus will be on the second half of the quote and the four different areas of thought, excluding morals. Mill would agree with Plato that the use of storytelling would work best when cultivating the minds of children on theological or moral content because most theological doctrines use proverbs, which are usually false stories that contain a small truth at the end. However, unlike Plato, Mill focuses on one’s ability to think “practically” as well as “scientifically” (Mill, 2002, p.10). In such instances, the telling of false stories will not suffice. Instead, …show more content…
In the Republic, Plato believes people should base their morals on the god 's behavior. After proving that gods are not bad, Plato specifically states, “. . . a god is good, he is not––as most people claim–– the cause of everything that happens to human beings of only a few things, good things. . .” (379c). Plato’s idea of basing one’s morals on the behavior of gods is not revolutionary, but a rather common thought. Many societies throughout history have placed an emphasis on religion when it comes to differentiating between right and wrong behavior, and when an individual was in the wrong in such a society, the religion dictated the punishment. However in Mill’s society where the harm principle is in place, a person who has done wrong forcibly performs kind acts for others, participates in community service, or serves in the military (2002, p. 9). By Mill recommending a person alter their bad behavior by performing altruistic services, one can see that Mill believes people learn more from correcting their wrongs, and seeing what a positive action looks like, rather than by being punished. Therefore, Mill would agree that the educational system in his society should repeatedly show students cases of a good action that benefits others versus a bad action that harms others to instill a moral code that functions in his
Plato answers this question by deducing that children be taught false stories containing small truths (377a). The only flaw in Plato’s reasoning comes from the fact that he does not elaborate on why he specifically chooses to teach kids stories instead of facts and lies instead of full truths. In order to figure out what Mill’s ideal mode of teaching would be and whether his lessons would contain more facts than lies, one must look at how Mill would respond to Plato’s mode of teaching. A cornerstone of Mill’s theory hinges on the “liberty of conscience” which he describes as “[the] absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects, practical or speculative, scientific, moral, or theological” (2002, p.10). For now, the focus will be on the second half of the quote and the four different areas of thought, excluding morals. Mill would agree with Plato that the use of storytelling would work best when cultivating the minds of children on theological or moral content because most theological doctrines use proverbs, which are usually false stories that contain a small truth at the end. However, unlike Plato, Mill focuses on one’s ability to think “practically” as well as “scientifically” (Mill, 2002, p.10). In such instances, the telling of false stories will not suffice. Instead, …show more content…
In the Republic, Plato believes people should base their morals on the god 's behavior. After proving that gods are not bad, Plato specifically states, “. . . a god is good, he is not––as most people claim–– the cause of everything that happens to human beings of only a few things, good things. . .” (379c). Plato’s idea of basing one’s morals on the behavior of gods is not revolutionary, but a rather common thought. Many societies throughout history have placed an emphasis on religion when it comes to differentiating between right and wrong behavior, and when an individual was in the wrong in such a society, the religion dictated the punishment. However in Mill’s society where the harm principle is in place, a person who has done wrong forcibly performs kind acts for others, participates in community service, or serves in the military (2002, p. 9). By Mill recommending a person alter their bad behavior by performing altruistic services, one can see that Mill believes people learn more from correcting their wrongs, and seeing what a positive action looks like, rather than by being punished. Therefore, Mill would agree that the educational system in his society should repeatedly show students cases of a good action that benefits others versus a bad action that harms others to instill a moral code that functions in his