John Stuart Mill The Harm Principle Analysis

Good Essays
John Stuart Mill discusses his theory on human nature in On Liberty. Mill portrayed his belief of the Harm Principle, which can be presented as the following: as long as one’s actions are not harming another person, the government nor society should intrude. The Harm Principle also protects the three basic liberties of freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and freedom to pursue tastes. Mill believes that the government should have the interests and opinions of the public in mind. On top of that, Mill feels as though an oppressed opinion results in a loss for society because even if an opinion is false, it may have some truth to it, and unless the opinion is voiced, the truth will never be heard. Every opinion should be argued against because …show more content…
The veil of ignorance would mean that no one could be held back by any predestined misfortune he or she may suffer from. Behind the veil of ignorance, every person in society would be equal because they would not be aware of their class status, social position, wealth, attributes, gender, or race, although this is a completely hypothetical society. This can also be considered as the original position, similar to but still different from, the human state of nature. Since no one would know all of these circumstances, no one would be able to determine where they will end up in society, and that would result in everyone making decisions, which would be fair for all. This society would be much more generalized, rather than being catered to each individual’s own situation. Rawls believes in justice as fairness, meaning that a just society is when everything is ‘fair’ for its inhabitants, although it can be uncertain what ‘fair’ really is. Rawls also believes that everyone in society should be concerned about each other’s wellness, looking out for each other and encouraging each other to do what is right, rather than what is wrong. Rawls idea of the original position and the veil of ignorance is meant so that any individual can understand the perspective, since every single person would be unaware of their circumstances in …show more content…
Mill and Rawls both have a belief on the right to the basic liberties such as freedom of speech, freedom of action, and freedom of assembly. Although Mill believes in society doing what is best for the majority, Rawls considers the fact there must be principles created to regulate the actions of each individual. Their theories both give humans the right to their own bodies, and to pursue what ever they would like to do, since every individual should be privileged to make the decisions that they please for their own selves. Similarities can be seen among the two, both seeing a just society. They both disagree with the idea of conformity, seeing as they promote individuality and the right to do as one

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Disobedience In Society

    • 1172 Words
    • 5 Pages

    This paper defends the right of citizens to consciously disobey laws in their society, after examination. People have a right to form idiosyncratic beliefs through their own conscience and rationality. Individuals should demonstrate the values they believe are worth losing their life, liberty, and property, through their actions. The actions they choose should not cause irreversible damage. People, compelled to act must do so regardless of the justness of their society.…

    • 1172 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Can society advance without all of its people? In John Stuart Mill’s essay “On Liberty”, he makes the argument that we should have the freedom to perform any actions we wish, as long as those are not causing harm to any others. Mill makes a number of justifications for his argument throughout his essay. He understands that in order for society to function, there needs to be certain restrictions on individual’s liberty. He believes society’s control over an individual’s liberty should only be restricted to prevent harm to others.…

    • 1816 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Freedom is a concept that cannot be mutually defined by all. This is because of the various aspects that impact one perception on what freedom is and how it should be achieved. Through the text Introduction to Social and Political Society by Omid Payrow Shabani and Monique Deveaux, Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill provide their unique philosophies on the concept on freedom and liberty. Kant stands behind positive liberty and advocates that the government can act as an institutionalized version of the best parts of ourselves meaning that freedom does not mean an absence of government but one that helps everyone become more reasonable. Mill, on the other hand, supports negative freedom and believes that the state should only intervene when…

    • 1090 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    He also reckons we need freedom to create an enlightened society and achieve happiness. However, how difficult is it to uphold the moral law? To answer this question from a Kantian point of view, any action performed must be done from a duty to the highest moral law in order to have any moral worth. What determines whether an action has moral worth or not is the maxim. Freedom ends when your choices begin to affect other people and morality is universal.…

    • 1793 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This is because it is based on what the reasonable man finds acceptable for a community to tolerate. With this theory of how morality comes about would allow prejudice and disdain to run our society. Dworkin argues a different way of determining what is immoral for society and believes that emotion is not the way to run our society. Justification beyond what is acceptable for the community is how Dworkin argues how deciding what immorality is should come about. These justifications cannot come from prejudice.…

    • 1204 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Divine Command Theory

    • 840 Words
    • 4 Pages

    This view states that “moral standards are relative to cultures or societies.” (Shafer-Landau, 293) I like this view because I believe that people should be able to live their lives according to their own moral standards. Cultural groups and societies should be able to dictate what is good and what is bad on their own. A moral code should not have to be validated by a god, people can be the authors of morality. The views of Cultural Relativism are very similar to sovereignty. Living in a world filled with many cultures it would be impossible to create one uniform moral code that could be accepted by everyone.…

    • 840 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This will not guarantee that justice would be achieved for the less fortunate, the original position states that everyone must come to a collective agreement to make sure that the “least well-off” will inherit equal shares of everything. I believe this is impossible because people will not agree for many reasons. The “veil of ignorance” produces an atmosphere in which the individuals are “unaware about their social status, gender, age, ethnicity, abilities, level of intelligence, level of education so on”. Also, the veil of ignorance is to influence people agree not to dwell on things of the past, or to forget about what was good to them, and to do away with any plans that they may have foreseen for their futures. Even if this was the situation people would not agree because they will not allow themselves to let go of their beliefs or what they know of their own attributes.…

    • 1272 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Mill implied that a person’s conduct and concepts deserves to be protected from social violation. A person’s act should be given freely and should not have any influences from customs, expectations, or public opinion. Mills indicated that the choice of behavior should come from the way we ought to be even it happens to be different from what others are not accustomed to (Philosophy Pages, 2015). Mill stressed that each individual is accountable for their selves that consist of their own feelings, ideas, and interests. However, the state justifies in controlling and limiting the behaviors of those posing harm to others through a violation of their rights.…

    • 1137 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    A social contract must be created while those in the society are in what is well known as the original position. The original position declares that principles centered on the concept of justice are only valid if all member of the society agree on them free from outside influences. Rawls also introduces the concept of the veil of ignorance, which is also required for these principles to be just. The veil of ignorance is the idea that those deciding on the principle would be ignorant of both their own and other members of the societies characteristics (socioeconomic status, race, religion, gender, etc.). These pre-requisites are necessary to create a truly just society, and without them equal opportunity will not exist within that…

    • 1057 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Rousseau's Social Contract

    • 1140 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Rousseau believes that, in order to achieve such, unity of the people must be of complete whole, and that all must comply with the social contract. Mill, on the other hand may argue in advantage to the individual or particular will (the good of the individual), that not all in society will conform to the social contract, and would prefer their private interests and individuality instead of the public good. Therefore, proposing individualism as a threat to Rousseau’s social contract in regards to “the problem to find form of association”. Rousseau agrees coherently with Mill’s supposition that individuals within society may have conflicting views from that of the whole. He consequently does not accept that privatised interests (particular will) of the individual needs any sort of acknowledgment.…

    • 1140 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays