John Stuart Mill’s Concept of Liberty
John Stuart Mill (20 May 1806 – 8 May
1873), British philosopher, political
economist, civil servant and Member of Parliament,
was an influential liberal
thinker of the 19th century. His On Liberty contains a rational justification of the freedom
of the individual in opposition to the claims of the state to impose unlimited
control, and has become a classic of libertarian philosophy.
Mill’s subject of this Essay is not the
so-called Liberty of the Will, but “Civil, or Social Liberty: the nature and limits of the power which
can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual”.
Mill
draws our attention to historical overview of
the “struggle between authority and liberty” describing
the tyranny of government, which may prove a “dangerous weapon” and
which, in his view, needs to be controlled by the liberty of the citizens. He
divides this control of authority into two mechanisms: necessary “political liberties or rights”, belonging
to citizens, and the “establishment of
constitutional checks”.
Mill
suggests that mankind became happy to be ruled “by a master” or by monarchy, if
his rule would be guaranteed against tyranny. However, mankind soon developed
into democracy where “there was no fear of
tyrannizing over self”. “This may seem axiomatic”, he
says, but “the people who exercise
the power are not always the same people with those over whom it is exercised”. As
a result, there may happen, in Mill’s terms, the “tyranny of the majority” (a phrase Mill takes from Tocqueville).
As
a consequence, the tyranny of the majority is worse than tyranny of government:
One can be protected from a tyrant, but it is harder to be protected “against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and
feeling”. [People will be compelled to follow the
rules made by the prevailing majority opinion, though it may not be correct and
will be fashioned by it.] Thus there can be no safeguard in law against the
tyranny of the majority
One
argument that Mill develops, in his concept of liberty, further than any
previous philosopher is the harm principle.
The harm principle holds that each individual has the right to act as he wants,
so long as these actions do not harm others. Mill declares the individual
freedom:
“Over
himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign.”
According
to Mill, there is only one legitimate reason for the exercise of power over
individuals:
“That the only purpose for which power can be
rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his
will, is to prevent harm to others.”
However,
Mill excuses those who are “incapable of
self-government” from this principle, such as young children
or those living in “backward states of
society”. Because, they do not, and cannot, have
sovereignty over self. Moreover, Mill also includes “barbarians”, considered as
“non-age”, as they cannot be sovereign over self.
Mill, unlike other
liberal theorists, makes no appeal to “abstract right” in order to justify the
harm principle. Mill argues that abiding by the harm principle is desirable
because it promotes what he calls the “free development of individuality” or
the development of our humanity.
A basic philosophical problem presented by Mill’s
concept of liberty is what counts as “harm
to others.” Where should we
mark the boundary between conduct that is principally self-regarding versus
conduct that involves others? Does drug-use cause harm to others sufficient to
be prevented? Does prostitution? Pornography? Should polygamy be allowed? How
about public nudity? Though these are difficult questions, Mill provides the
reader with a principled way of deliberating about them.
Mill
now states some components or manifestations of his anti-paternalistic principle of
human liberty:
*the
freedom to express opinions,
*
the freedom to pursue tastes and pursuits as long as they do not cause harm,
*
the “freedom to unite” or the freedom
of assembly.
“No
society [...or...] none”, in Mill's view, “is completely free in which they [these freedoms] do not exist
absulute and unqualified.”
Mill defends the liberty of free speech, even if it is false: he
holds that free discourse is a necessary
condition for intellectual and social progress. Because,
first, open exchange of ideas helps individuals abandon erroneous beliefs.
Second, these beliefs are kept from declining into mere dogma, by forcing other
individuals to re-examine and re-affirm their beliefs in the process of debate.
Utiliterian approach is another concern of
Mill’s concept of liberty. James A
Stegenga (1973) says “he is usually included among those writers who followed Jeremy
Bentham and James Mill, J. S. Mill's father, in maintaining that the principle
of utility does and should govern all human actions.” It
is important to note, however, that Mill makes it clear throughout On
Liberty that he “regard[s] utility as the
ultimate appeal on all ethical questions.” To
Mill, “actions
are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend
to produce the reverse of happiness” (Collected Works, X.210).
Individual
liberty is also reflected in John Stuart Mill’s religious view, influenced by John Locke.
He holds that individuals are rational enough to make decisions about their
good being and choose any religion they want to.
In order to draw conclusion, we must assert that
John Stuart Mill has fullfilled the demand of time with his essay On Liberty. It has become an
enormously influential work; the concept of
liberty presented within it remains the basis of much political thought
since. Even , “to this day, a copy of On Liberty has been passed to the
president of the British Liberals and then Liberal Democrats as a symbol of office and succession from the
party that Mill helped found.” (Wikipedia).
However, On Liberty can be
criticised for being overly vague on the limits of liberty and for placing too
much emphasis on the rights of the individual. It can further be suggested that
it does not make a useful distinction between actions that only harm oneself
and actions that harm others. Yet, bearing these criticisms in mind, On Liberty
does provide an impassioned plea for tolerance and a necessary recognition that
it is not possible to be completely sure that any particular way is the best
way to live.
Works Cited:
Cowling, Maurice. Mill
and Liberalism. Cambridge, 1963.
Mill, John Stuart.
The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill. Gen. Ed. John M. Robson. 33
vols. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1963-91.
Stegenga,
James A , J. S. Mill's concept of liberty
and the principle of utility, The Journal of Value Inquiry 7, Springer
Netherlands, 1973.
Comments
Post a Comment