Chapter Summary Mills 'Chapter 1 Of John Stuart Mill'

Mill sees the betterment of humanity as tethered to the betterment in nature, as increased action

Mill’s rebuttal to the third objection is based off that Christians do not read the Bible every time they have to make decisions. Furthermore, Mill says that ever since humans have existed we have learned from our ancestors what certain effects result from certain actions and that through time we have the consciousness to tell apart from what’s right and wrong. It is true that as humans we want to perform actions that promote pleasure and the absence of pain, but most of our human experiences follow common-sense morality. Mill provides a distinction in utilitarianism where he gives a fundamental principle of morality and a subordinate principle through what he calls the criterion of rights and the decision procedure: “Whatever we adopt as

After reading chapters 3 and 4, Of the Ultimate Sanction of the Principle of Utility and Of What Sort of Proof the Principle of Utility is Susceptible, respectively, I found that I agree with many of the ideas presented by Mill. However, there were also some ideas presented within the text with which I disagreed. Of the ideas presented within the text, a critique of the origination of moral feelings from chapter 3 and the argument of what people ultimately desire from chapter 4 are discussed below.

If we were to live in a society where John Stuart Mill’s harm principle was the only normative basis for law, we would live in a society in which racism, sexism, and other forms of oppression could never be dealt away with, a society in which no business owner could be judicially discouraged from putting up a sign that says, “WHITES ONLY,” or “NO JEWS,” outside of his or her business, and as a result, a society that would be constantly teetering from one outbreak of genocidal violence to another. Perhaps this might seem like an over dramatization, but the fact of the matter is, if “the only purpose for which power [could] be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community…[were] to prevent harm to others,” than by anyone’s count,

Biases: John Stuart Mill, was an influential English- speaking philosopher that based his theories around freedom of action. Mill was against the discrimination by the government toward society. He believes that society should have the right to act by their own means without harming someone else, then the individual should not be questioned, but if their actions cause consequences then the government has the right to act on punishment.

First off, the morals and standards and how the higher class looks at itself in a society will most likely have most influence of morality in that society. Then, citizens of that society are more inclined to follow the rules of their religion and this also included in the rules of conduct for society. The basic interests of any society influence moral sentiments as a single piece. ¬ Mill also shows that it isn't the actual interests in someone that influence, but rather the good interests and bad interests that come from experience. Mill also says that there is really no full religious freedom. Mill believes that the most a society can impose influence on someone is to protect others. If someone places themselves in a position that is only dangerous to them, society has no right to according to Mill.

Mill was a British philosopher in the nineteenth century who supported the philosophy of Utilitarianism. Utilitarianism, in essence, is the idea that the most moral thing a person can do is carry out actions that cause happiness for the most people. The idea implies that an action causing the removal of an individual’s happiness is required to increase the happiness of a larger group of people. For example, a utilitarian would generally see the killing of a terrorist as morally just, because even though the act of killing a single person is usually not condoned, it is morally justified to kill one person in order to prevent harm to others.

It can be assumed that due to his intensive lifestyle and lack of emotional expression, Mill suffered from severe depression. In the midst of his depressive state, Mill began utilizing arts as a way to explore his feelings, before overcoming his state (King et al., 2009). After establishing a friendship with Harriet Taylor, Mill was able to express his emotions, while furthering his intellectual work (King et al., 2009). Eventually, they married and Mill attributes much of his philosophical work to Taylor (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). The main themes of Mill's philosophical life work, regarding the advancement of psychology, are centred utilitarianism (King et al., 2009). As a result of the work of Jeremy Bentham, utilitarianism is regarded as a principle of moral basis, which states that actions should provide the greatest good for the largest amount of people (King, et al., 2009). However, Mill differed in his views of utilitarianism, focusing on the consequences of an act and judging its worth based on the happiness it provides (Shiraev, 2011). Futhermore, Shiraev (2011) describes Mill's view of utilitarianism as a basis for determining if an action is correct, and if and only if, it affords pleasure for all who are influenced by the event. Mill regarded only those individuals who were knowledgeable, as having the ability to decide whether an action is in the best interest of all (Shiraev, 2011). In Mills book ‘On Liberty’, Mill expounds his concept of individual freedom within the context of his ideas on history and the state. On Liberty depends on the idea that society progresses from lower to higher stages and that this progress culminates in the emergence of a system of representative democracy. It is within the context of this form of government that Mill

Only in a society comprised of individuals free to have individual ideas and free to express them among each other, can the society that Mill envisioned come into fruition. However, even with these two conditions fulfilled, Mill is still relying on an

John Stuart Mill published an essay in 1859 that attempted to explain the power society could have over the individual. His essay focuses on the struggles between Liberty and Authority. The point he was trying to make is liberty was created for protection against political tyranny. In earlier times rulers would suppress the rights of citizens. To achieve their liberty the citizens call for a limit to be placed on the power of the government.

A quilt, of tiles patch worked together has been the definition of freedom in the United States. The tiles of this quilt are the laws to which every person who lives in this country are bound to. These laws vary in scope, subject matter, and severity, hence being different tiles in the quilt of freedom. While these tiles may look different, be of different size and texture, all of these tiles fall into two categories. One category is “You cannot do this” and other is “You can do this”.You can hire a person to build reapers, but you can not enslave a person to make them build reapers for free. You can negotiate with this person on their wage, but you do not have to hire them should you all not agree on a wage. Freedom is not measured in wealth, is it measured in what you are allowed and not allowed to do as

John Stuart Mill believes that a state and society are permitted to override the liberties of individual only when an individual is doing something that will harm others. That’s mean unless the individual is harming others, the government should not interfere with an individual life. He believes that everyone has the rights to make their own choices, and has the responsibility to protect one another. So if one is trying to harm themselves without harming others, then the society should not do anything by take away individual freedom. The society should let a person do whatever they want for their own happiness. However, if an individual trying harm him or herself trough their action, but he or she actions might harm others, then the society

Mill’s view is that when given the “opportunity of exchanging” new opinions, individuals will be able to establish a “clearer perception and livelier impression of the truth” (24). Going off this notion, the permission of free expression throughout a society would allow for an entire population of individuals to begin contributing toward these exchanges of thoughts; consequently, said society would be able to progress at a quicker rate than if particular beliefs were prohibited or repressed because a larger amount of participation would lead to a higher chance of a new truth being discovered. Additionally, free and open discourse could prevent the formation of ‘dogmas’ about which Mill warns us. He uses politics as an example in his text, stating that a healthy political system is one which is composed of both “a party of order or stability and a party of progress or reform” (58). Without the radical party (progressives), the party of stability (conservatives) would be able to impose their personal doctrines onto an entire nation with no need to provide any rational explanation. Freedom of expression permits individuals to act as a counter voice against the customary beliefs of a community, which would then force the majority to logically defend these customs, thus eliminating the possibility of dogmas. Mill cites 19th century religious doctrine as an example of a failure of this process, mentioning how an English man in 1857 “was sentenced to twenty-one months' imprisonment” for saying words deemed offensive against Christianity (33). Mill claims that this forbiddance of opinions that opposed the Church can be blamed as the reason why the religion had “[made] so little progress in extending its domain” beyond European nations during the eighteen centuries of its existence (53). Using Millian philosophy, had Christians

Mills expounds on his philosophy of the pursuit of pure social science by explaining that he believes that every working social scientist must have his own refined practice which is his own scientific intellectual craft and that all social scientists must be their own methodologist and theorist and he demands that this type of intellectual craftsmanship does not rely only on only boring scientific technical proficiency which completely lacks inspiration but seeks originality and ingenuity in the field.

Mill stresses in his novel On Liberty the idea of choice and the human right to make one’s own decisions. He believes that the power of choice is one of the most valuable characteristics a human being has. In the eyes of Mill, individuality is a beautiful key component in the development of one’s life. It should be