John Stuart Mill Argument For Freedom Analysis
a) Explain, using your own examples, John Stuart Mill's case for freedom of expression.
John Stuart Mill was a Utilitarian, believing that all ethical questions should be decided by applying the Principle of Utility. This principle states that the morally correct action in any situation is that which will increase happiness for the greatest number of people.
Actions are right in proportion that they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.
From Warburton, N. (2007, 4th edn ), Arguments for Freedom, The Open University p 61.
Mill's use of the word happiness differs from the everyday usage, he includes the intellectual higher pleasures of thought and prioritises them over the lower pleasures of the senses.
It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, is of a different opinion, it is because they only know …show more content…
A society would gain more from implementing freedom of speech because of Mill's arguments than not.
A clear theme throughout Mill's argument is the point that debate and discussion are necessary in order to construct opinions in a rational way. Freedom of expression is a necessary condition for free and open debate. If we read Mill's arguments as advice to government, then we can see that he is advocating a transparent and rational decision making process.
If Mill's arguments are applied on a macro scale, then the answer to whether or not they are successful lies in the sort of society that we wish to create. If we agree with Mill and want to create a society of “intellectually active people”(Ibid., p 87) then his arguments are good reasons for implementing freedom of speech. Therefore Mill's case for freedom of expression is
John Stuart Mill was a Utilitarian, believing that all ethical questions should be decided by applying the Principle of Utility. This principle states that the morally correct action in any situation is that which will increase happiness for the greatest number of people.
Actions are right in proportion that they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.
From Warburton, N. (2007, 4th edn ), Arguments for Freedom, The Open University p 61.
Mill's use of the word happiness differs from the everyday usage, he includes the intellectual higher pleasures of thought and prioritises them over the lower pleasures of the senses.
It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig, is of a different opinion, it is because they only know …show more content…
A society would gain more from implementing freedom of speech because of Mill's arguments than not.
A clear theme throughout Mill's argument is the point that debate and discussion are necessary in order to construct opinions in a rational way. Freedom of expression is a necessary condition for free and open debate. If we read Mill's arguments as advice to government, then we can see that he is advocating a transparent and rational decision making process.
If Mill's arguments are applied on a macro scale, then the answer to whether or not they are successful lies in the sort of society that we wish to create. If we agree with Mill and want to create a society of “intellectually active people”(Ibid., p 87) then his arguments are good reasons for implementing freedom of speech. Therefore Mill's case for freedom of expression is