Mill On Liberty

Improved Essays
The election of a democratic government, accountable to the popular will of the public, represents the majority who have historically sought to subjugate those who hold differing moral beliefs or viewpoints. This oppression is known as the “tyranny of the majority” (Mill 1859, p. 10) and is not exclusively political in nature. Although each individual may legitimately pursue their own ambitions, society has the means to diminish the right to freedom of self-expression by ostracising an individual for behaviour that differs from the social norm. Mill considers this to be an even more brutal form of tyranny than that which the government may impose upon us, as it is much more difficult to liberate yourself from. Consequently, the rules of conduct …show more content…
In On Liberty, Mill (1859, p. 60-61) offers four reasons as to why freedom of speech is essential; to deny the opinion of another is to assume that our views are never erroneous; sometimes an opinion may only be somewhat true, therefore free discussion is required to discover the whole truth; although people may express an absolute truth, if it is not discussed then others will lack the comprehension to understand it in its entirety and hold the opinion in contempt; the withholding regular and meaningful conversation results in the essence of a truth being lost upon us, because although people may acknowledge an opinion as being true, they find no way in which to relate it back their individual experiences. Mill refers to several examples of how a lack of open discussion contributes to denial, as well as an inadequate understanding of concepts. Relating this back to the thesis question, if somebody does not possess the self-awareness to understand their reasons for wanting to do something, they probably also lack the foresight to see how it may adversely affect the people around them too, thereby subjecting them to a will that is not their

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Throughout history philosophers have argued over every topic one could imagine however one of the most explored topics is the rights of citizens. What must those who enter a society under their free will give up to be an active member? Is the government allowed to ask you to give up some of your rights for the betterment of society? Questions such as these and countless more have been answered and debated by philosophers for years. Some of the most prominent arguments have been made by John Stuart Mill and John Locke.…

    • 1161 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Why America Is Losing It’s Liberties And What We Can Do About It. “America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”…

    • 383 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The subject of an experiment cries out, “I can’t stand it. I’m not going to kill that man in there” (Milgram 120), as the experimenter compels his subject to administer deadly electrical shocks to another man. The subject clearly expresses his moral objections to these instructions, yet to influence his subject, the insistent experimenter does not lock the door, nor does he hold the subject at knifepoint- he only requests that the subject “Continue, please” (121). And so the subject continues.…

    • 1212 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    In Fahrenheit 451, society is mainly consisted of technology consumed, zombie-like citizens that are held authority by a cruel, mind-controlling government. Our American culture experiences the opposite of this idea; members are lively and are held under democracy, and have a sense of freedom and privilege. Fahrenheit 451’s culture displays mechanical obsession that causes tyrannical-like control, while current American society uses technology for the better and has freedom of speech. Fahrenheit 451 contains characters who are brain-dead from television and other forms of technology.…

    • 1224 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great 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
  • Improved Essays

    In a Democratic society many take freedom for granted, while others believe that they are not given enough freedom. Dave Eggers introduces us to a society that is searching for what they believe to be “total freedom”, while Megan Boler provides readers with examples of media in democracy and how freedom is portrayed in each form. Both sources allow the audience to see that freedom does require a balance of control. A world with total freedom would instead lead to a society with many feeling violated, this is why there needs to be some level of external control exerted on citizens. What needs to be found and determined is that proper balance of freedom, and how to address this balance with citizens of each and every community.…

    • 739 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mill On Dissent Opinions

    • 534 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Mill asserts that there exists a “peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion…, robbing the human race… [and] those who dissent from the [unpopular] opinion, still more than those who hold it.” Mill supports his assertion that silencing one individual is equivalent to silencing mankind itself by exploring the consequences to not only the dissent opinions, but also the prevailing majority beliefs, and ultimately society as a whole. Mills abstractly states that if the dissent opinion was in fact true, individuals who perpetuated the censorship lost “opportunity of exchanging error for truth,” and if the dissent opinion was false, the majority loses the ability to gain “the clearer perception and livelier impression of the truth, produced…

    • 534 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    As society evolves and modernizes, so does the way that governments rule over their citizens. They begin to tailor their words and laws to make themselves appeal to the people, while true intentions stay hidden. These laws can scrape away at the very core of a civilization; taking them down from the inside. Especially in today’s age, where the lines between democracy and absolute power can be blurred by politicians who see themselves as above the law.…

    • 707 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved 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
  • Decent Essays

    John Stuart Mills faced the major question of how and when to limit the sway of public opinion over the individual liberty of the people. He discusses the concept of liberty, and the power society can hold over individuals. The concept of the Democratic Republic as used by the United States illustrates that people with power will use that power to enforce their will over those without power. Society will oppress the minority and can do so using public opinion rather than political means. Mills then delves into citizens need for protection from the rising public opinion because society will impose its values on others.…

    • 290 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Mill focuses on the concept of a clear distinction between when the authority of society can limit individuality and when there can be “sovereignty of the individual over himself”; however, he also argues the point that control should be given whenever society and the individual have an interest in a particular part of human life (82). Mill rejects the notion of a social contract, which Locke argues for, but due to the protections provided by society, the citizens owe a return for these benefits. He defines the harm principle by each individual having the right to act however they please, as long as it does not affect the person undertaking the action. Society cannot intervene, even if the act the person is committing causes harm to them. Each…

    • 1426 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved 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
  • Great Essays

    Mill makes several assumptions regarding the ability of society to rationally understand the difference of harmful and offensive. There is a grey area when it comes to differentiating what is considered to be practising one’s freedom of speech or being offensive to those around them. Since there is no concrete definition on what can be considered to be ‘freedom of speech’, John Stuart Mill, author of On Liberty focuses on prohibiting the government from limiting freedom of speech and allowing citizens to have no limitations on their speech under the exception of harming others.…

    • 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
  • Superior Essays

    Board of Education, the ruling was merely a check against the majority to protect the rights of minorities. Majority rule is important in a democracy; yet when the majority infringes on rights of minorities, the power of the majority must be diminished in order for society to maintain justice. In Brown, it was noted that, “The plaintiffs contend that segregated public schools are not ‘equal’ and cannot be made ‘equal’ and that hence they are deprive of the equal protection of the laws” (188). It was disclosed that separate educational facilities were unequal and unjust, and thus it may hinder a child from gaining the educational rights he deserves and “to separate…generates a feeling of inferiority as their status in the community that may affect their hearts and minds in a way unlikely ever to be undone” (189). Segregation prevented minorities from gaining the equal rights they deserved and thus, it was important for them to achieve justice through Brown.…

    • 1346 Words
    • 6 Pages
    • 6 Works Cited
    Superior Essays