Introduction To Social And Political Society By Kant And John Stuart Mill

Improved 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 …show more content…
Government plays a very crucial role in the concept of freedom as government’s have power over society. Kant believes in a central form of government that can allow individuals to pursue to interests. In other words, Kant feels that government is necessary to ensure that others do not interfere with one’s interests and chance of pursuing then. Kant states, “At the end which is a duty in itself in such external relationships, and which is indeed the highest formal condition of all other external duties is the right of men under coercive public laws by which each can be given what is due to him and secured against attack from any others.” (Kant 174) Kant is explaining that men have the right to be protected from others while attaining the freedom that they deserve. Mill takes a different stance on this because he believes that to achieve true freedom, the government should only intervene when one’s freedom poses harm to others. Mill thinks that laws should be minimal and do not act as an infraction of one’s freedom. Mill argues against positive liberty as he believed it was a potential threat to the pursuit of happiness. A clear contrast exists between Kant in Mill because Kant believes that rationalism was of great importance whereas Mill thought that happiness was the common goal of all people. The two differ on this matter because Kant thinks …show more content…
Forcing humans to give restrict their freedom to gain freedom from the state is a contradicting concept. This form of government is much more autocratic and demanding of citizens. This is no way of freedom. Negative liberty would be a much more successful approach to freedom as society is now highly civilized and this is a laissez-faire. The common goal of all people is freedom as everyone wishes to be able to achieve what they want without the government telling them it is not right. With the evolution of human rights, it has been made clear that humans should be as equal as possible and society will function to its greatest ability when the humans live freely. This means that the government intervenes when necessary because of offensive or harmful acts (Rohlf 2016). In positive liberty, the government is there to tell you exactly what to do to not break the law, therefore remaining “free”.

Clearly, freedom is a topic of great relevance to our society that has been interpreted through many different lenses. Kant and Mill both share their strong views on government. Through understanding their philosophies, it is clear that the government has a strong relevance to the concept of freedom whether it is autocratic or laissez-faire. Although most people are confident their definition of freedom, it would be unrealistic to think that a mutual form of freedom could be achieved

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    In the Preface of the textbook, Give Me Liberty! , the author Eric Foner draws attention to three key points about the concept of freedom and its importance in American history. The three points are “the meanings of freedom, the social conditions that make freedom possible, and the boundaries of freedom that determine who is entitled to enjoy freedom and who is not”. Foner’s concept of freedom address that freedom is more than one variable. Over the years as America grew and change to be what it is now, history shows us that the meaning of freedom has and can change depending on the situation of the time then.…

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Freedom is a cloudy term, and various ideologies perceive it differently. However, while it is plainly difficult to define what we mean when we throw around the word freedom, we treat freedom like a unity. For such a complex, ill-defined construct, freedom is deployed in literature and society exceedingly often. Morrison deconstructs this unity, overturning the assumptions attached to the…

    • 1411 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The Revolutionary Era During the time of the Revolutionary wars within America, France, and Haiti, there are differing opinions of independence. By evaluating each source given, the variations are evident. In terms of these revolutions, each county’s idea of liberty has several different meanings. For example, the United States discusses that all are entitled to certain unalienable rights, among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Whereas, the Declaration of Rights of Man and Citizen in France, states that men are born free and equal in rights.…

    • 1397 Words
    • 6 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
  • Great Essays

    The idea of freedom in Jean Jacque Rousseau’s The Social Contract (1762) is present throughout the book and Rousseau’s own, personal understanding of freedom underpins his argument for his ideal state. In this essay I will argue that individual citizens aren’t truly free in every sense in Rousseau’s state as the sovereign has complete dominion over public matters and due to the sovereign explicitly being composed of every citizen, this could lead to nearly every problem being deemed within the public realm. Furthermore, one cannot be individually free, in my opinion, when one cannot voice dissent against the prevailing convention of society, as is the case in Rousseau’s state. To argue this thesis effectively I will explore what freedom means…

    • 2188 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great 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
  • Superior Essays

    Enlightenment ideas were highly embodied in the declaration of United State Independence. The major enlightenment ideas highlighted that each and every citizen has the right to reason, autonomy, and the notion that all human beings are equal by nature. In addition, enlightenment ideas stated that the government and religion are separate. In this essay, I will highlight how the different enlightenment ideas were embodied in the declaration of Independence in the United State of America.…

    • 980 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    1776-1800 Dbq Essay

    • 723 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The newly created United States government upholded the Revolutionary principles from 1776 to 1800 by creating the basic law and order of our government in current time. The United States government in the period 1776-1800 relied on Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Adams, and George Washington to produce the foundation of the new American government. Successfully, the five writers developed important reference documents that Americans still use today for freedoms and rights. In document one, John Locke, an enlightenment thinker, writes in his “Second Treatise on Government” that a man will allow himself give up his rights and subject himself to the dominion and control of an other power of government. This statement implies that man is only interested in his own self, his own liberty, and his own property.…

    • 723 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Some people believe that complete freedom will bring chaos to individuals because humans need some sort of leadership, and some believe that freedom brings only opportunities to show how great some people truly are. These two contrasting views on freedom are explained through the philosophical texts and views of Martin Luther King Jr and Thomas Hobbes. Martin Luther King Jr enlightened the entire world with his views in Love, Law and Civil Disobedience and Thomas Hobbes showed the world a new side of political philosophy with his work in Leviathan. In both of these works one can see the contrasting views on freedom and can judge what influenced these views based on the time period that these philosophers lived.…

    • 1218 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Mill’s On Liberty and Marx’s The Communist Manifesto are both political works about how they believe the government should be run in which they both believe that the people should not be oppressed by the government or other people. However, both differ in their opinions of what type of form a government should be; Mill believes that the government should take on the form of liberalism where it plays a limited role on society that emphasizes on individual freedom and freedom from tyranny of the majority. Marx on the other hand, believes that communism is an ideal form for a government where it will emphasize equality for the people that will eliminate exploitation among one group of people over another. While Mill believes human nature is detached…

    • 1913 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great 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
  • Improved Essays

    Due its prevalent nature, freedom, in general, cannot be placed in a particular category or as an idea. Rather, it has been the focus of insistent conflict in American history. The history of American freedom is an anecdote of deliberations, disagreements, and struggles rather than a set of an everlasting continuum or an evolutionary narrative toward a predetermined goal. The ideal meaning of freedom is an impacted privilege at all levels of society.…

    • 909 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • 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.…

    • 2226 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Superior 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
  • Improved Essays

    “We could not prove freedom to be something actual in ourselves and in human nature. We saw merely that we must presuppose it if we want to think of a being as rational and as endowed with consciousness of its causality as regards actions” (Page 311). Immanuel Kant believed that freedom is a presupposition of morality. Kant was not concerned with the purity of your will for doing something, but rather with the derivation of moral principles from reason alone for example independently of experience. He focused on emphasized the importance of reason and the ration that comes with our moral principles.…

    • 703 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays