Freedom and development are key in a human society and both Marx and Mill have quite distinctive views on these terms. John Stuart Mills is known to be one of the most influential philosophers of the nineteenth century. He had a liberal political view on society and culture itself. The majority of his philosophical theories are solemnly aimed towards the possibility of progress in the development of human knowledge and individual freedom. Mill justifies freedom through the value of liberty. He believes that liberty has positive effects on individuals and on society as a whole. Karl Marx, who is also known to be a very influential philosopher from the nineteenth century was a German philosopher who strongly criticized political systems. His
…show more content…
He discovers that in order for a liberal government to exist, there must be a liberal society. A liberal society can only develop if the individuals are educated, mature, and virtuous and are self-controlled. To Mill, the only government that can fully satisfy the social state is a ‘participatory government’ where all individuals participate. In Mills theory of government, there must be a balance of protection of individual freedom against the oppressive or ‘tyranny’ majority. It is necessary for a system to allow the widest measures of opportunities for participation, as the only way progress and development in society can take place is through ‘the political education of a free people’. Preferably, Mill would rather have government involvement at a minimum in the lives of the citizens but he understands that the government must intervene in some situations, like preventing crime and government enforcement of health and safety in workforces, for example. Therefore, it is necessary for individuals to be educated and politically mature, which is understanding the politics of the community and what politics is producing; through this is where Mill’s proposition emerges. It is paramount that individuals have liberty and the government in which they live under, positively seeks to develop one’s character. The government as understood by Mill, must encourage and …show more content…
To Marx, freedom is the development of the human capacity through non-instrumental labour. In capitalism, labour is counted as a marketable commodity and the workers who make the products for the market are not getting any profit. Labour is being used to maximize profit and the workers are being stripped of the creative experience. This limits the freedom of individuals to be able to find their way of living. Let alone not being able to make individual choices, choices are being made for them in which the end result is not of their liking. The individuals are not getting a chance to make decisions based on the collective good, especially when they have the ability to do so. For Mill, freedom is the absence of coercion. He believes that individuals should not interfere in the choices of others. The freedom of speech and action is essential for progress and development in the human society. Whereas for Marx, he believes progress is possible in the human community if individuals made choices based on the collective good of the
He discovers that in order for a liberal government to exist, there must be a liberal society. A liberal society can only develop if the individuals are educated, mature, and virtuous and are self-controlled. To Mill, the only government that can fully satisfy the social state is a ‘participatory government’ where all individuals participate. In Mills theory of government, there must be a balance of protection of individual freedom against the oppressive or ‘tyranny’ majority. It is necessary for a system to allow the widest measures of opportunities for participation, as the only way progress and development in society can take place is through ‘the political education of a free people’. Preferably, Mill would rather have government involvement at a minimum in the lives of the citizens but he understands that the government must intervene in some situations, like preventing crime and government enforcement of health and safety in workforces, for example. Therefore, it is necessary for individuals to be educated and politically mature, which is understanding the politics of the community and what politics is producing; through this is where Mill’s proposition emerges. It is paramount that individuals have liberty and the government in which they live under, positively seeks to develop one’s character. The government as understood by Mill, must encourage and …show more content…
To Marx, freedom is the development of the human capacity through non-instrumental labour. In capitalism, labour is counted as a marketable commodity and the workers who make the products for the market are not getting any profit. Labour is being used to maximize profit and the workers are being stripped of the creative experience. This limits the freedom of individuals to be able to find their way of living. Let alone not being able to make individual choices, choices are being made for them in which the end result is not of their liking. The individuals are not getting a chance to make decisions based on the collective good, especially when they have the ability to do so. For Mill, freedom is the absence of coercion. He believes that individuals should not interfere in the choices of others. The freedom of speech and action is essential for progress and development in the human society. Whereas for Marx, he believes progress is possible in the human community if individuals made choices based on the collective good of the