The book ‘On Liberty’ was “published in 1859 and was known as John Stuart Mill’s finest and most controversial book” (Austin, 2000). In his classic work Mill (1859) sets out to “investigate the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual”. In ‘On Libery’, it was emphasized that that individuals should be able to do what they want if their actions are self-regarding (Cohen-Almagor, 2017). According to Saunders (2016), self-regarding actions “are actions that have an impact on an individual’s life and does not have an effect on others”. The use of freedom with self-regarding actions is of interest because of its potential of having a positive impact on an individual. This essay will present John Stuart Mills views on individuality, diversity, truth, progress and harm, as expressed in his book in “On Liberty’ and how Mill promoted toleration and was against the suppression of ideas. It also identifies how his principles of freedom leads to human happiness and progress.
In ‘On Liberty’, Mill (1859) protects the freedom of the individual against “tyranny of the majority”. According to him, there are certain customs, beliefs and opinions that is accepted by a large group of people that expect and pressure other individuals on adopting it. Similarly, Ten (1980) states that “the attempt to force, by customary and other pressures, essentially different people into a uniform mould will stunt and warp them”. In other words, obeying and living one’s life as other people want it will have a harmful effect on the individual. As it is human nature to have different personalities, the impact of the oppression will limit their potential capabilities and hinder their development. A fair society as Crabtree (2018) mentions, is never ensured with the majority ruling. Thus, Mill’s views on protecting the individuals from the majority force ensures that individuals are given opportunity on how they want to live.
In the third chapter of his book, in ‘on individuality’, Mill (1859), “argues that individual decision and originality are what makes liberty worth having”. His objection is that if a man accepts custom without questioning or thinking about it than he is not making a choice (Berlin as cited in Ten, 1980). Without choices, a person is not developing in himself the basic distinctive qualities of perception, judgement, feelings and preferences which makes up a human being (Mill, 1859). Similarly, Mill (1859) also believes that since each individual is different, a necessary condition for them to develop their potential is to have them exposed in a variety of situations. On the other hand, customary practices and elites should guide individuals on the correct path on how to choose (Ten, 1980). Both customs and elites should set examples of right and wrong but it should be the individuals who makes choices for themselves. Individuality is basically making a choice for yourself to learn and grow.
Furthermore, according to Cohen-Almagor (2017), freedom gives happiness and contributes to the advancement of the social and cultural society. Mill was a keen advocate of progress. “Liberty is necessary for the free development of individuality and without liberty there is one wanting one of the principle ingredients of human happiness and quite the chief ingredient of individual and social progress” (Mill, 1859). He also argues that new ideas, tastes and styles of living will lead to the progress and improvement of the society as a whole (Mill, 1859). Hence freedom needs to be valued as it is an important condition for individuality which will produce good consequences. Progressivism is important as the advancement will lead to an improvement of the human condition. Therefore, freedom is the determinant of a progressive society (Levin, 1999).
In addition to individuality, “truth is a keystone of Mill’s plea for liberty of thought and expression” (Cohen-Almagor, 2017). Mill (1859) believes that searching and finding the truth increases knowledge. According to Mill (1859), even false opinions must be tolerated for the possibility of it being true since it is difficult to differentiate between opinions. For this reason, no idea should be dismissed, all views should be listened to before deciding the truth in it. He reasons that free and open discussion is bound to bring the truth and a diversity of thoughts and views which is a positive societal good that leads to progress. “Free and open discussion is bound to bring the truth” (Mill, 1859). Thus, a diversity of thoughts and views is beneficial for the general society in bringing progress.
Similarly in Chapter 2 of ‘On liberty’, Mil’s ideas of religion in the search of truth is that despite peoples belief, the truth can be tempered with (Mill, 1859). Religious people often tend to view the ideas of non-religious people as unreliable, Mill disapproves of this thought and says that being religious does not mean that they can make the best decisions, it is the truth that matters (Mill, 1859). Mill does not believe that the personal integrity of an individual should be overlooked (Mill, 1859). For him there is no association between religion and honesty because to him honesty is a personal quality, not religion (Mill, 1859). According to Cohen-Almagor (2017), “Religion without reflection might become a coercive force which are upheld by believers that are not open to dispute and debate”. It is not possible for individuals to live in a similar manner due to their personality hence it is the diversity of character and culture that provides the basis that drives the nation forward.
Moreover, “Mill’s liberty principle allows intervention to the freedom of the individual in order to prevent harm to others” (Saunders, 2016). Mill (1859) states that there is a need for a grounded principle such as ‘the harm principle’ for the society that governs individuals. This principle states that the state may punish a person only to prevent harm to others (Holtug, 2002). Hare’s (1972) idea of harm is that to “harm somebody is to act against his interests”. Abiding by the ‘harm principle’ is necessary since it encourages the free development of individuality. The harm principle offers freedom and development of humanity with restrictions that benefits everyone.
According to Meany (2020) “On liberty is not merely a political text explaining the intricacies of how the state should act but is a love letter to the individual virtues of intellectual curiosity, tolerance and open mindedness”. Mill did not want a future where peoples lives were based on customs, regulations and habit. It was Mill’s (1859) belief that only through the freedom of thought and discussion that mistakes can be eradicated, the truth can be realized and progress be attained (Hampster-Monk, 1992 as cited in Corden, 2002). Reeves (2016) rightly calls ‘On Liberty’, “the greatest celebration of the value of human freedom ever written”.
Mill promoted toleration and despised censorship. Mill not only gave us principles of liberty but more importantly he encouraged the practice of liberal thought. Benn (2014) mentions that Mill “attached great importance to individual autonomy when it came to the values to live by and argued powerfully that those who presumed to censor the expression of opinions were making an absurd assumption of their own infallibility”. Similarly, even non-legal censorship does harm to the fundamental principles of freedom of speech and thought as the legal regulations (Id, n.d as cited in Bloom, 2017). There is always a possibility as humans that we are mistaken which is why censorship is never justified. Hence, it is important to allow a diversity of opinions as it more beneficial rather than censoring it. In addition, toleration encourages respect towards the right of others and assists in promoting an open and stable society. Mill was indeed ahead of his time.
To conclude, Mill sees liberty and diversity and opinions leading to truth as a way to progress. On Liberty answers vital questions of the future and offers a timeless solution on toleration and censorship through his views, opinions and principles on individual liberty, liberty in general and liberty from state and society. Mills principle of liberty has become a defining part of our laws, daily lives, education and culture. It guides and directs people. What Mill gives us is a way to think about many contemporary social problems. The rules, the institutions, the surrounds, the liberal societies, the harm principle, the free speech rule he set out remain as good a place as any to begin any discussions about the regulation or otherwise the personal behaviour. The impact Mill had is immeasurable. Even hundred sixty years after the publication of On Liberty, it sill remains as one of the required and influential readings. Thus, it can be said that Mill has given us a picture of how to live and what constitutes a good life.
References
Austin, A. (2000). On Liberty Study Guide. Gradesaver. https://www.gradesaver.com/on-liberty
Benn, P. (2014). What is the Value of Toleration. Prospect Magazine. https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/philosophy/what-is-the-value-of-toleration
Bloom, L. (2017). John Stuart Mill and Political Correctness. University of Louisville Law Review. 56(1), 1-36. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3024294
Cohen-Almagor, R. (2017). J. S. Mill’s Boundaries of Freedom of Expression: A Critique. Royal Institue of Philosphy. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/6B0C67F2EA2DAE08B6C08D5FD83AC1BB/S0031819117000213a.pdf/js_mills_boundaries_of_freedom_of_expression_a_critique.pdf
Corden, L. (2012). The Role of Progress in Mill’s Argument in ‘On Liberty. E-International Relations Students. https://www.e-ir.info/2012/10/08/the-role-of-progress-in-mills-argument-in-on-liberty/
Crabtree, V. (2018). The Tyranny of the Majority. How Democracy can be bad. The human truth foundation. https://wwwhumantruth.info
Hare, R.M. (1972). Wrongness and Harm. In: Essays on the Moral Concepts. New Studies in Practical Philosophy. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-01278-7_7
Holtug, N. (2002). The Harms Principle. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 5, 357-389. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021328520077
Levin, M. (1999) On a Contradiction in Mill’s Argument for Liberty. Politics. 19(3),153-157. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9256.00099
Meany, P. (2020). An Introduction to John Stuart Mills on Liberty. Libertarianism. https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/introduction-john-stuart-mills-liberty
Mill, J. (1859). On Liberty. Electric Book Company. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/auckland/detail.action?docID=3008614
Reeves, R. (2016). John Stuarts Mill’s on Liberty.
. Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jf_6hsMJRNA.
Saunders, B. (2016). Reformulating Mill’s Harm Principle. Oxford Academic. 125(500), 1005-1032. http://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzv171
Ten, C. (1980). Mill on Liberty- a Victorian Web Book. Clarendon Press. http://www.victorianweb.org/philosophy/mill/ten/ch5.html
May 2020.
