Js mill on liberty chap 4-5 PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Js mill on liberty chap 4-5 PDF

Description

J.S. Mill – On Liberty Chapter 4 Progressing society towards the truth When you’re doing something for custom you’re not gonna be happy/not gonna progress We won’t benefit from the life/ideas You have to test all the customs, not do them just because -

-

-

-

This is not a doctrine of selfishness: “harm principle”, in the end allowing them to harm themselves will be better in the long run for society Ppl need to have to suffer the consequences of your actions: p.75 should be allowed to avoid ppl we don’t like Might want to discourage them from self-harming, caution them What about social ostracizing? Balance my rights as an individual with your rights P.78 “the distinction here…general resources of the community” – there’s no such thing as just personal harm and it usually spreads “I fully admit…society at large…not for the extravagance” o makes a distinction b/t behaving in a way that only harms yourself and that behavior that leads you to violating society at large and ppl next to you Limits of authority over individuality -- society and the individual should receive control over that part of human life that it is particularly interested in Rejects idea of social contract however we should respect the society as we should owe them a certain conduct since it does protect us We must fairly share the burden of defending society and the ppl in it together We shouldn’t be censored by law but by opinion – only if it affects the interests of others Society shouldn’t worry about what affects only an individual “penalties” = natural reactions to some behavior when we point out faults in other ppl’s behavior  they can’t make the person feel uncomfortable if they do not engage in different activities for example (i.e. being drunk) moral reprobation if it’s only an inconvenience and it doesn’t directly violate fixed obligations then society can bear it also if it’s a harmful action then it could serve as an example for others NOT to do the same society will prob interfere wrongly SHOULD NOT BE COERCIVE if you don’t agree, simply PREACH Mill about the “harm principle” that in society, ppl are close enough where their actions can affect others o Should we be limiting liberty then? o Very high standard for harm since individuality is so important Free reign to criticism but limits punishment (which is an action and is subject to regulation) Concerned with the size of the state, the bigger it is the more intrusive it is

-

-

-

Does believe in mandatory education but that the state should pay for it NOT provide it because then everyone would have the same education and be the same (no conformity) – would agree with private schools BUT NOT with public schools and agrees w/ homeschooling The state can tax only for the purpose of raising revenue is fine BUT NOT when it’s interfering with personal liberty, like taxing to try and stop you from smoking for example Gambling and prostitution should be legalized – harms only yourself You can’t sell yourself into slavery or kill yourself because as a utilitarian it doesn’t make any sense – permanently affect your utility and liberty Harm principle = what kinds of limits to liberty are (un)acceptable

Chapter 5: -

-

-

-

2 basic principles to his essay: 1. ppl are not accountable to society for actions that affect only themselves a. society can show disapproval through guidance, persuasion, instruction… 2. individual is accountable for actions that hurt other ppl a. society can def punish them b. (free trade is allowed because socially beneficial) this is an example of liberty: o a person should be warned about the danger of crossing an unstable bridge, but should not be forcibly prevented from crossing if he understands the risks important to council or instigate ppl cuz they should be free to exchange opinions (see chap 3) doesn’t think we should discourage vices through stuff like taxation government’s power: 1. person most qualified to perform an action is usually person who has direct interest in it 2. useful for ppl to do things themselves for their personal development 3. bad to add gvment power because too much power can stifle reform in order to preserve its own interests – against interest of the ppl (important political question) liberty of action only through dissent, only through disagreement and conflict of ideas, that society can be bettered and an individual can gain the perspective to help himself

Next class: Marx – lack of economic resources = barrier to liberty...