How Did John Stuart Mill Introduce New Ideas Of Tyranny

Decent Essays
Ashli Trammell
PSR#4 RE-WRITE

John Stuart Mill was a philosopher that wanted to justify the freedom of an individual under state control. He wanted to make a contribution to the progress of human individuality and freedom. Mill believed that people had no control over their own political power. The people had all the power once their will progressed and the majority had all the power. But the people made sure that majority would never abuse their power again. Mill was able to help the people achieve self-improvement and have another Revolution. Mill managed to introduce new ideas of tyranny and give the people some sort of protection from the political rulers. The new concept was called the tyranny of the majority. The people came up with

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The ends don’t always justify the means. Mill also believes in free will which has its issues. People can’t be trusted, because if people were given complete freedom to decide how and when to act in attaining greater good, they would all be selfish. People would act on selfish reasons and justify their actions as if they were for the greater good.…

    • 1819 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Forcing someone to do or not to do something is morally unacceptable. Mill was also an advocate in free speech. He thought it was necessary for creativity, knowledge, and personal growth. He believed it was important for the people of the state to debate public policy. There are many similarities and differences between Aristotle and Mill.…

    • 828 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • 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

    Mills thinks that justice is related to moral requirements. He believed that the idea of justice must change depending on social and individual happiness. Mill believed that civil disobedience should only come from a moral point of view and it should be presented to people’s thinking and beliefs rather than physical initiative. Martin Luther king, on the other hand, was a man of action when it came to civil disobedience. He would actively refuse to follow laws that were unjust and try to change them by direct actions and provocation.…

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    John Stuart Mill, a philosopher during the mid-1800’s, is known as one of the most important western political philosophers in the past three hundred years. Many of his arguments on freedom can be seen intertwined with the current way we run societies around the world today. Being a self proclaimed Utilitarian, Mill focuses his arguments on making the collective reside with the most utility possible, with utility being defined by happiness. To achieve maximum utility, Mill presents three larger arguments,the harm principle, experiments of living, and freedom of speech. Before one can begin to agree or criticize Mill's arguments they must first delve into the core of Mill’s teachings, the harm principle.…

    • 1836 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved 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

    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

    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
  • Superior Essays

    Mill, for instance, supported government, however, expressly stating that the power of government should be limited to prevent the government from “preying on the flock.” He believed that there needed to be certain political rights or liberties which would be regarded as a “breach of duty” if the government in place were to violate it. In fact, Mill felt that a rebellion was a justifiable response to such breaches of liberty akin to Marx’s belief that a proletariat revolution was necessary for progress. Such breaches may include the removal of certain freedoms such as the freedom of speech, which Mill believed was necessary for the advancement of society. Moreover, Mill believed in the establishment of “constitutional checks,” in which the community or its representatives gained some power of consent in important acts of the governing power.…

    • 1298 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    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.…

    • 2454 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The criterion of right and wrong controversy has yet to be concluded though many years of argumentation have ensued. Mill attempts to explain the criterion of right and wrong using the concept of utilitarianism. Utility is not something that should be contrasted with pleasure, but rather pleasure itself with the freedom of pain. The criterion of right and wrongness is introduced for utility as the actions are right in proportion if they promote happiness and are wrong in proportion if they produced the reverse of happiness. Happiness is defined by pleasure and the absence of pain and unhappiness is vice versa.…

    • 1637 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mill has a prominent theory of liberty which he wrote about in his book 'On Liberty' in which the aim of the text is elaborate on and to defend the principle on which 'the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual' (Gray 2013), and he would then go on and describe liberty as 'the importance, to man and society, of a large variety in types of character, and of giving full freedom to human nature to expand itself in innumerable and conflicting directions.' He argues that the only authoritative power that can exert power upon people is that of society itself. He again argues that the times where one's liberty can be interfered with by society or certain individuals are for reasons of self-protection. He finds that when a certain law or any public opinion may be good for one's own good and their welfare, but that this not mean that these laws or opinions can be used to coerce others and that coercion is only acceptable when an individual may cause harm to another (Gingell et al 2000). Mill's theories were influenced by his father James Mill, and by fellow philosopher Jeremy Bentham and Bentham's subsequent philosophy of Utilitarianism.…

    • 2041 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved 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
  • 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