Feidrich Hayek And John Stuart Mill Analysis

Superior Essays
This essay will compare and contrast two highly revered political philosophers, Freidrich Hayek and John Stuart Mill. Hayek and Mill are widely known for their work on the philosophy of liberty. It is important to compare and contrast these thinkers because of the impact they still have on society today. Hayek is a classic negative liberty thinker, basing his views on the importance of the lack of outside interference on a man pursuing his own will. Mill, however, is a positive liberty thinker, basing his opinions on a man being his own master and attaining his highest possible self. One can see differences in their views based on the fact they hold opposing methods of thought, however, they still hold some similar views. It will be proven …show more content…
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. Every citizen should have a voice and participate in the government through some public function. Individuals must be allowed to participate if they are to work positively for society as a whole. Mill asserts that there is no such thing as a good despotism because the ruler would have to be all seeing. Individuals must protect their own interests, and this is found in Representative Government. Hayek disagrees with Mill on the necessity of Representative Government. Hayek holds the bar lower for freedom and does not see the political choice as a necessary element in defining liberty. An individual should be free to do what he wants, to the extent, that it does not impede on other persons’ liberty. This means that liberty is not tied to political freedoms, the number of choices you have, or physical capabilities. Liberty, in Hayek’s view, is solely tied to being able to pursue your own will …show more content…
Hayek believes in little to no government interference in an individual’s life. Hayek argues strongly against coercion and does not even believe in the use of coercion to prevent greater coercion. Coercion cannot be prevented completely, however, in Hayek’s view it should be as limited as possible. Planned economies are a huge form of coercion, and an example Hayek explains in-depth. The individual in this system has no liberty to the extent that they are dependent on the state. All the economic and political power rests with one person or a body of persons. An individual in this system has a set role and must do what task he is given. To not accept your role or not perform your duty is to accept your death by starvation. While these socialist ideas want to create a utopia, in the end, they take away individuals’ liberty. Another example from Hayek of the negative impact of coercion. Mill, to an extent, agrees with Hayek. This is an example of the philosophers agreeing, but for different reasons. Mill believes there should be something similar to a private sphere for the individual. Private sphere, meaning an aspect of an individual’s life outside of government control. A person should be able to do what he wants without interference if it does not hurt or negatively affect another in a substantial way. In Mill’s view, individuals need to have

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    Just like Rand’s Equality trying to rediscover individuality, John Stuart Mill in his book On Liberty argues about the individuality of mankind. Near the beginning of the book, Mill states his thesis of Individuals having the right to thought. He continues, arguing that the right of thought is not unique to one person nor another in…

    • 1660 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    These traits prevent man from becoming miserable and without piety, more importantly Christian compassion and mercy. The acceptance of “conservatism” as the description of the growing movement of opposition to the rule of liberalism was not automatic nor without strenuous opposition. Both Frank S. Meyer, who eventually became one of the acknowledged leaders of the conservative movement, and F. A. Hayek, who did as much as any other single person to give direction and a sound footing to the movement in opposition to the planned economy, wrote vigorously against conservatism as a description of their position. Although recognized as one of the founding fathers of the conservative movement, Hayek has never been willing to describe himself as a conservative; he prefers to be known as an “Old…

    • 2141 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    He also argued the premise that man has an innate right to life, liberty and property. Locke argued for a commonwealth in order to ensure the “protection of its members’ ‘civil interests’” (pg 66). Similarly, Mill, a liberal 19th century English philosopher, had an obsession with the individual and promoted democracy as the solution to a just government.…

    • 1598 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    John Stuart Mill’s philosophy contained a limited government or the notion of laissez-faire (hands off)! Concluding that men should be given civil rights as long as no harm was done to anyone. John Locke claimed all mankind was equal, believing that State of Nature has natural rights to freedom, liberty and justice. Meanwhile, Hobbes posed the notion that man was inherently evil and needed a monarchical government but both were against the Divine Right and developed the ‘Social Contract’(Carol 2017).…

    • 376 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    John Stuart Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville, both were advocates for individual freedom, and liberty through democracy. Mill and Tocqueville both feared tyranny, and promoted democracy so that citizens could have individual liberties, and thoughts. Mill’s ideal citizen in a democracy would be participatory, and opinionated in their beliefs. His citizen would not curtail any other citizen’s belief, no matter how far off of their beliefs it is. Tocqueville’s ideal citizen would be one who participates at a local level of politics.…

    • 724 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    He believes that tyranny of the majority may allow society to infringe on individual freedom will lead to conformity and oppresses and threatens an individual’s freedom, helping it to promote social censorship. For example, Mill stated that tyranny of the majority is more horrible than political oppression because it will affect and permeate people’s lives more, (Mill, Pg. 4) This shows that regular people such as family, friends, colleagues, and classmates will have more of a direct impact on an individual than people at the political or national level, showing that it is not the government or society that needs to be in check, but the other individuals or group of people that are harming the individual. Mill explains that people who wants freedom from social tyranny has to resist social conformity and moral behaviors that does not fit with their ideals, beliefs, or lifestyles, in which society at this point is a tyrant that enslaves the soul. Protection must be made on the basis of principle and can only stop if the individual do harm to society…

    • 1913 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    He also argued that we should have more faith in the process of discussion, rather than the process of our own beliefs. When societies continue to conform to the authority (the government in this particular case) discussions cease to exist, and “dead dogma” occurs. Mill gave the example of religion, more specifically Christianity, to demonstrate how people follow tradition in a way that doesn’t challenge them to think for themselves. The Christians went about their lives following church rituals without asking any questions of why they followed them. This is a perfect example of why Mill would argue that this is why we need more people like the creators of the “Don’t Tread on me” website.…

    • 1180 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mill saw the problem with modern society as resulting from the power of both the tyranny of the majority but also the tyranny of public opinion. He believed that public opinion had grown too strong to the point where “At present individuals are lost in the crowd. In politics it is almost a triviality to say that public opinion now rules the world.” (On Liberty, chapter III). The “lost in the crowd” metaphor is a powerful one that illustrates Mill’s view.…

    • 996 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • 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

    At a time when the common people were not allowed to make decisions that could benefit the economy, Adam Smith stated that individual decision-making is crucial in order to maintain and support an economic system. When people have the right to freely pursue their own economic interests, the country will benefit (Document C). The country benefits because of what Adam Smith mentioned, which was an “invisible hand.” This invisible hand causes the sum of self-interest to result in the best possible interest for the state. Again, individual freedom is shown to be a key factor in improving…

    • 791 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    In order to guarantee the loyalty of its members, the law should also appropriately protect the individual freedom of its people. In regards to Mill, it appears that he somewhat agrees with Rousseau’s argument of the function of government. Mill argues for a representative democracy that would facilitate the development and evolution of liberty for its members. He believed that a representative democracy would only represent the interests of its people and would therefore lessen the resistance between the ruler and its people. Mill…

    • 1838 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • 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…

    • 2454 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    John Stuart Mill is a very important and popular philosopher in the 19th century. He is one of the earliest advocates of Utilitarianism. He defines the theory of utilitarianism in his book, Utilitarianism. It focuses on the general good of individual pleasure. Mill tried to provide evidence for his theory of moral utilitarianism and refutes all the arguments against it in his book.…

    • 1239 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Thus, the ideal character 1 J. S. Mill, On Liberty 4 for Mill is the one who is able to establish a balance between the general ability to obey the social rules and the capability of thinking for oneself.2 It is now clear that, in Mill’s understanding, society is in the helpful position to improve individuals faculty. However, considering practical life, it is very controversial whether Mill’s theory is applicable. Many scholors seems to be considered Mill’s theory as an inconsistent in itself. The most obvious reason for this is that regarding Mill as a utilitarian, the happiness of the majority should be considered first, but the criteria which is given by Mill seems to be contradicted majoritiy’s priority.…

    • 2009 Words
    • 9 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