More handpicked essays just for you.
Criticism of j s mill's representative government
John stuart mill freedom of thought and discussion
John stuart mill freedom of thought and discussion
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Criticism of j s mill's representative government
I will attempt to justify that John Stuart Mills approach to the argument of Freedom of Speech is the most valid, and the only instance where expression should be limited is where it causes an immediate harm or violation to the rights of others. I believe that expression should be limited when it causes harm to others or violates their rights. This view coincides with J.S Mill’s “Harm Principle”. I do not believe that hate speech should be prohibited as it merely
As stated in the previous case, Mill defines every human as having liberty as long as that liberty does not get in the way of others. In Case B, there are two arguments, Professor Prestille and Professor Mannis. Prestille is mad at Mannis because Mannis told his students that Prestille’s class is not a good class. Mannis tells his students that “postmodernism”, Prestile’s class topic, is a bad thing. This short essay will explore how this conflict would be seen using John Stuart Mill’s philosophy.
Whether it is at the dinner table or in my family’s group text message, the conversation about my brother’s custody battle with my mother’s side of the family seems to remain a bitter topic, especially when discussing my role in it. When my father physically harmed my brother to the extent to which he had to go to the emergency room, the custody trial over my brother and me began. After several sources provided the judge with accusations against my father, I was the final source that needed to assert or deny my father’s abuse; with heavy consideration, I decided to lie to the judge by denying my father’s abuse. Under the principle of utilitarianism, philosophers would infer that lying is permissible if the consequences of doing so are good.
This is a harm to the children and to the husband but it could be enjoyed by the husband in private. So some actions are offending and some are harmful so it is hard to relate which one was Stuart Mill talking about in his harm principle? Cause, a harmful and an offending situations are not easy to separate especially if there are different people involved. Lord Devlin in his book of morals he speaks”there are difficulties with relying on what an ordinary person would find morally acceptable” According to Mills harm principle he assume that one can embark on an action that doesn’t affect others.
At one point or another you've probably read or seen Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. So you know the basics, but do you know the nitty gritty things like the motivations of characters, how their interactions were designed to affect the plot in very precise ways, or how certain scenes affect the themes and plot? All of these can be represented by Romeo and Juliet themselves. Romeo and Juliet have multiple conflicting motivations. There’s the obvious, Romeo is a Montague, and Juliet is a Capulet.
I think I will divert the train to the right killing one person because one person is less important than five. Sometimes it is important to do what is right than what is morally good to do. The utilitarianism is a moral theory that gives happiness to the number of people in the society and it has been considered greatness, an action is morally appropriate if its outcomes lead to happiness and wrong if it results in sadness. I will begin by describing what Mill might do in the Trolley situation. Next, I will contrast what Kant might do in this situation and lastly, I will be also going to give my opinion on this Trolley situation.
One may say, “If I do something that’s only harming me, then society can’t step in and force me to do otherwise.” However, isn’t everything we do affecting other people in the society? For example, if a person were to not vaccinate his newborn and his newborn contracts a disease, it will affect others in society. In response, Mill would acknowledge that people are not fully isolated from society, and therefore the actions those people take will ultimately affect others and possibly do harm. However, he says, "But with regard to the merely contingent or, as it may be called, constructive injury which a person causes to society by conduct which neither violates any specific duty to the public, nor occasions perceptible hurt to any assignable individual except himself, the inconvenience is one which society can afford to bear, for the sake of the greater good of human freedom” (Mill 80).
How often have heard a Honduran speak nicely of his or her country? Probably only one out of ten Hondurans feels authentically proud of their homeland. In fact, we tend to criticize or complain about our own country, justifying our indifference with social and political problems. Many dictionaries define cultural identity, as a sense of belonging. It is important that every individual is able to identify with its country´s culture, as it allows them to acquire love to their country.
My topic originated from reading Thomas Carlyle and John Stuart Mill 's debate in December 1849-January 1850. Both writers published anonymously in Fraser ' Magazine, with Carlyle writing a violent critique, ‘Occasional Discourse on the Negro Question’, and Mill sending in an outraged response simply entitled ‘The Negro Question’ that appeared in the following issue. Counteracting Carlyle 's very racist vision of the repartition of work among Black and White Jamaicans with arguments undermining that conception , Mill retorted But I again renounce all advantage from facts: were the whites born ever so superior in intelligence to the blacks, and competent by nature to instruct and advise them, it would not be the less monstrous to assert that
Francis Cabot Lowell was the founder of the mills Lowell Massachusetts in the mid 1800’s that created a company for machines to make fabric and textiles for profits. The jobs that was created for women. During that time, the majority of women have sacrificed to work outside of the farm and leave their families at home to work at the Lowell Mills. All of these sacrifices benefit them to earn money, help their families, and even to become independent. This show how women were willing to cooperate with the environment for money, but after the factory reduce their wages, the women began to strike leading them to lower hours of work.
As the other great Victorian essayist, John Stuart Mill tries to address a fundamental problem of the new Victorian era in his work; specifically, he challenges the traditional idea of women naturally subordinated to men. Mill’s focus is mainly on the middle class women, raised to be ladies, who are not self-sufficient individuals and have to rely on their husbands. They are the ones who need to realize their conditions of subordination, alongside the men who are preprinting it, and demand equality to men. In the first paragraph, Mill states that not only “the legal subordination of one sex to the other” is wrong, but it is also one of the major obstacles “to human improvement” (Mill 1105).
Mill understood that humans have a hard time look past what they know to see opposite views, and when it comes to groups we have a hard time going outside of our single group. We put ourselves in groups with those who think like we do on purpose. This means that we are only ever exposed to a single side where no one questions its validity. When once in a group people become comfortable with what they know, and they pick those who do not challenge or disagree with them, but when it comes to groups who oppose our views, then we tend to find the individuals intolerable and subordinate. When we find ourselves in these situations we cannot help but be prejudice to those who oppose
Introduction: John Stuart Mill essay on Consideration On representative Government, is an argument for representative government. The ideal form of government in Mill's opinion. One of the more notable ideas Mill is that the business of government representatives is not to make legislation. Instead Mill suggests that representative bodies such as parliaments and senates are best suited to be places of public debate on the various opinions held by the population and to act as watchdogs of the professionals who create and administer laws and policy.
I chose to review the fifth chapter of “New Ideas From Dead Economists” titled The Stormy Mind of John Stuart Mill. John Stuart Mill was born in 1806 in London to two strict parents who began to educate their son at a very young age. Mill’s father was James Mill, a famous historian and economist, who began to teach his son Greek at the age of three. The book reports that “by eight, the boy had read Plato, Xenophon, and Diogenes” and by twelve “Mill exhausted well-stocked libraries, reading Aristotle and Aristophanes and mastering calculus and geometry” (Buchholz 93). The vast amount of knowledge that Mill gained at a young age no doubt assisted him in becoming such a well-recognized philosopher and economist.
Being Free 1st draft Freedom is word used in a lot of contexts, but the official meaning of the word is “the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants” (Freedom). Meaning that you have the right to do something, with the focus being on you as an individual. This means no one can tell you what to do, like for example a state. This is an important aspect and part of political theory. Liberty is also used and viewed as the same category of theory, and has the definition “The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s behavior or political views” (Liberty).
