Research Paper On John Stuart Mill

The utility test stems from the Utilitarian Principle where the consequences of one’s actions determine right or wrong; the ends justify the means. Utilitarian ideas primarily came to fruition in the eighteenth century as three of the most prominent utilitarian philosophers released their works within the same timeframe, all principally speaking to the greatest happiness principle. John Stuart Mill, a distinguished British philosopher of utilitarianism, once stated, “The creed which accepts as the foundations of morals, Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” Specifically meaning that the only relevant actions are those producing consequences that can be derived as either good or bad (West, 2010). The purpose of one’s actions is to create a better life through the influx of happiness with the decrease of unhappiness in their surrounding environment; the best course of action to pursue is the path that manufactures the best/greatest possible outcomes.

This paper will discuss John Stuart Mill’s argument about the freedom of expression of opinion, and how Mill justified that freedom. I will also discuss how strong his argument was and whether or not I agree with it. John Stuart Mill was a political economist, civil servant, and most importantly an English philosopher from the nineteenth century. Throughout his writing, John Stuart Mill touched on the issues of liberty, freedom and other human rights. In his philosophical work, On Liberty, he discussed the relationship between authority and liberty, as well as the importance of individuality in society. In chapter two of On Liberty, Mill examined the freedom of expression in more detail, examining arguments for and against his own.

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

Furthermore, Despite Walter Glannon’s second argument against genetic enhancement for personal gain, I contend that the philosophy of John Stuart Mill and Utilitarianism can be used to show that society should will that genetic enhancement be morally acceptable if the adverse cognitive or emotional effects are outweighed by the benefits. Glannon argues that gene enhancement is morally objectionable because “there would be the unacceptable social cost of some people suffering from adverse cognitive or emotional effects of the enhancement.” Under Utilitarianism, society would likely deem that genetic enhancement is acceptable even though there is a risk of adverse cognitive or emotional effects. This is because the consequences of the

John Stuart Mill and Marx can both be classified as the most important thinkers of the Enlightenment era in their analyses of human freedom and progress and their differing views of how humans could achieve this progress and ultimately how the modern government should be run.

He believed that no one should not be criticized by its gender or religion. Mill expressed himself behind his work. He defended the right of individuals. In his autobiography, he wrote, "the importance, to man and society . . ., of giving full freedom to human nature to expand itself in innumerable and conflicting

John Stuart Mill defends objectivism about intrinsic value within utilitarianism. A theory of intrinsic value indicates what things are valuable for their own sake. Within the Theories of Intrinsic Value, we think of Objectivism and Hedonism. Objectivism is best described as: Certain ways of life are intrinsically valuable, even if they hold less pleasure than others. Some things are valuable regardless of, and independently of, the pleasure they may produce. In contrast, hedonism states that pleasure and pleasure alone is intrinsically valuable. It is my belief that Mill’s defense of objectivism succeeds.

We believe that John Stuart Mill’s “On Liberty” is inconsistent in his view of the Liberty Limiting Principle. To show his inconsistency, we will outline and explain several examples drawn from the text itself. Examples that will be presented include the Utility principle and the principle of Legal Moralism in regards to organized religion.

John Stuart Mill is a famous philosopher that has paved the way in the philosophical world and has ideas that are even demonstrated in society today. From how beliefs about happiness and pleasures can create rules to how the freedom of speech can effect society, Mill has made his mark on the world through great arguments on the behalf of his beliefs. Throughout this essay I will go into detail about; the principle of utility and John Stuart Mill’s take on utilitarianism, his theory of rights, his arguments for a right to free speech, and how the right of free speech produces beneficial consequences to society.

John Stuart Mill uses much of the same reasoning to defend freedom of individuality as he did with the defense of freedoms of opinion. As he stated earlier in chapter 2, “ages are no more infallible than individuals; every age having held many opinions which subsequent ages have deemed not only false but absurd…” meaning the majority is not always correct and could be imposing opinions that are incorrect (pg 21-22). This same argument applies to individuality. When people are forced to conform to one way of living, the possibility of finding a better way to live is impossible. Each person’s life, when given the freedom to live their life in a way that does not harm others, acts as an experiment. The more varied the experiments, the better a

    John Stuart Mill was an English philosopher, political economist, and civil servant. He was born May 20, 1806; in London. Mill’s father is well know historian and philosopher James Mill(1773-1836). At the tender age

Sentiments are described as having all justification of moral beliefs “grounded” in emotions. Mill says, “But there is this basis of powerful natural sentiment; and this it is which, when once the general happiness is recognized as the ethical standard, will constitute the strength of the utilitarian morality,”. By saying this, he is stating that natural sentiment is better, instead of forcing happiness and the actions taken to attain that action, it’s better if it happens on its own. Mill also says that sentiments has two sanctions: External and Internal. External sanctions are instrumental considerations (reward/punishments, favor/disfavor). Internal sanctions are duty; conscience; that we feel good or bad having performed an action. Thus, if internal sanctions provide the strongest influence over people's actions, utilitarianism must appeal to people's inner sentiments in order to exercise a binding force on them.

John Stuart Mill, English philosopher and social reformer, was one of the most influential figures of the nineteenth century. His writing includes a wide range of topics in ethics,logic,religion, economics, current affairs, and social and political philosophy. His most significant writings include Principles of Political Economy, Utilitarianism, and The Subjection of Women.With strong influences from his father and his father's mentor, Jeremy Bentham, he adopted their ideologies and became a leading figure in utilitarianism. As a result of Mill’s large philosophical and literary output we are able to apply his ideas and theories into everyday issues and topics.

John Stuart Mill discusses the conception of liberty in many ways. I’d like to focus of his ideas of the harm principle and a touch a little on his thoughts about the freedom of action. The harm principle and freedom on action are just two subtopics of Mill’s extensive thoughts about the conception on liberty. Not only do I plan to discuss and explain each of these parts on the conception of liberty, but I also plan to discuss my thoughts and feelings. I have a few disagreements with Mill on the harm principle; they will be stated and explained. My thoughts and feelings on Mill vary but I’d like to share my negative opinion towards the principle and hope to put it in a different perspective.

In his essay, Mill explores the two dimensions to liberty; individual and social. Carefully he analyzes the variance between the individual and social sphere through freedom of expression, more specifically, freedom of speech. Throughout the novel, he expresses that