Mill On Liberty

In On Liberty, Mill thinks that it is beneficial to the good life if the liberty of a person can only be legitimately limited in order to prevent the harm of others. He believes that the good life is based on the principle of utility, where the greatest amount of happiness is achieved for the greatest amount of people. He believes both individuals and society are capable of self-improvement and argues for liberty on the foundation that individuality is beneficial to society because it leads to personal development. Mill defends non-interference in two main areas; thought and discussion, and action. He thinks government action will inevitably pose a threat to liberty and therefore must be carefully monitored. Mill makes many powerful points
Mill argues, “in proportion to the development of his individuality, each person becomes more valuable to himself, and is, therefore, capable of being more valuable to others. There is a greater fullness of life about his own existence, and when there is more life in the units there is more in the mass which is composed of them” (779 On Liberty). In other words, individuality is good because it promotes happiness for the self, which ultimately promotes happiness for the whole of society. This is an essentially utilitarian argument, because individuality is valued as a means of achieving happiness and not for being of inherent value
His main principle states that “the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action or any of their number is self-protection…the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others” (752). Mill’s harm principle allows individuals to do whatever they please so long as it does not harm others. However, utilitarianism is by definition concerned for the collective well-being and prescribes limiting individual liberty in order to add to the happiness of the collective. The harm principle implies that the utility principle has no power within the domain of the individual so long as their actions are “self-regarding” (753). For utilitarians, there is only one principle: that of utility. Mill is introducing a second, the principle of liberty, and seems to privilege it the same by protecting it, regardless of its contribution to overall happiness. Mill cannot label his argument “utilitarian” because favouring a principle that does not necessarily maximize happiness is not conducive to