ipl-logo

In Defense Of John Stuart Mill's On Liberty

1753 Words8 Pages

The question of man's individual freedom and liberty weighing against the dictates of rulers has steadily endured in discussion since the Age of Enlightenment, and while many Western philosophers have pondered the limits of this question, this issue remains hotly debated even today. This age-old question of how to properly balance man's rights to liberty with his obedience under authority has persisted since ancient times1. Those who have probed these ideas have laid the foundations for liberalism as an ideal. The main argument of the liberal philosopher John Stuart Mill's On Liberty is of the need for individuals to have a proper balance of liberties and freedoms in life juxtaposed with deference and respect for laws and institutions in place. Mill was correct in his assertions that liberty and freedoms for the individual would be the driving force in countering the stagnation of society. Mill seeks to solve the problem …show more content…

Mill makes the argument that men will eventually oppress themselves through the tyranny of the majority.8 Furthermore, minority groups and perhaps ethnic groups would have their needs overwhelmed by the majority group, similar to a tyrant's control. Whereas the prevailing opinions of the time may certainly be incorrect and to an extent ignorant, there also needs to be protections against the tyranny of the prevailing feelings and opinions of society9. Constitutional measures in terms of checks and balances serve as a counter-measure for America, as well as the federal government disallowing tyranny through its separation of the minority and majority. Other ways to curtail tyranny of the majority would be to allow more votes to the rich or elite, and proportional

Open Document