Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
This is an example of how American politics and the American legal system have pre-empted any sort of social discussion or values creation, and the values creation came after the law was enacted. This is from a purely non-religious standpoint, as many religious people would argue the opposite. The argument against gay marriage, from the religious perspective, is precisely what Mill was trying to protect society against by making sure other people did not hinder someone else's ability to freely express themselves as long as these expressions did no harm to others. It is difficult to argue against gay marriage as a practice that harms other people in a physical manner, and thusly, Mill would likely conclude that this practice is one born out of the individuals' right to express themselves. However, it can easily be seen that an issue like gay marriage falls under the category of a behavior or practice that does no harm to anyone outside of the social contract itself. In a democracy, these and other minority viewpoints must be protected against outside influence and harm. As long as minority and unpopular viewpoints can exist within a society, it can be considered a "free" society. When certain viewpoints are restricted or legislated out of a society and the society itself is allowed to define what is good for the individual, the society is no longer a free society that does no harm to the individual.
It is only then that true liberty has taken place as it has provided a forum and a backdrop for examination of all sides in an issue and given all parties the chance to determine if they still believe in what they stood for (Mills). According to the essay Mills also does not believe society or the government has any actual or absolute control over an individual. In the essay
Moreover, how does he justify saying one would rather be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool who is satisfied? His point is obvious - it is better to have brains and not achieve happiness than be dumb and be contented. But Socrates, brilliant as he was, chose death over exile from Athens, which it can be argued did not lead to happiness in Socrates nor in the students who admired
Personal usefulness or utility is not required to clash with public usefulness. Usefulness or Utility is often misguided for pragmatism. but, pragmatism is the affinity to encourage certain preferred objective, regardless of the consideration between what is correct and reasonable. Utility is the standard level of being practical, and hence it must take into account not just what would generate a preferred objective, but what would encourage the maximum
Political Philosophy II: Theories of Freedom John Stuart Mill's On Liberty is one of the foundational defenses of liberal, democratic government. According to Mill, there are certain core principles "that should regulate how governments and societies, whether democratic or not, can restrict individual liberties."[footnoteRef:1] Mill wrote that regardless of whether a monarch, dictator, or even a democratic majority governed, the only reason to deprive others of their liberties was what he
Plato and John Stuart Mill Glaucon's challenge to Socrates at the beginning of Book II of Plato's Republic is to clarify in what sense justice is a human "good." Glaucon begins by separating goods into three categories: those which are harmless pleasures with no results, those things which are good in themselves but also lead to good results (like knowledge or health), and those which are unpleasant in themselves yet lead
For Singer, the human community must receive justice, not simply a society setting its own local standards of morality and justice, as in Mill's argument. For Singer there are no 'imperfect' obligations, rather all obligations are absolute. Someone who merely does no harm to others, or extends help only to family members and his or her immediate community is committing a moral wrong. Even someone who is 'good' but