Life and Works of J.S. Mill Project Report Essay Example

Life and Works of J.S. Mill: Project Report Essay I take this opportunity as a very proud student to thank the other contributors whose value addition in the making of this project cannot be undermined. Let me start with my parents who sent me the financial back-up to study in this university and arrange facilities so that I can study and flourish without much trouble, without which I could not have possibly been able to compile this project. Next come my batch-mates who have contributed both intellectually by discussing on the topic and non-intellectually by letting me have all the peace of the world when I needed to concentrate. The staff, especially Dr.D Anand who has patiently put up with us in class and answered all our queries and introduced us to the higher level of social thinking, More than being a direct contributor, it has been his unwavering sincerity and dedication to the profession of teaching, which is such an immense rarity at our university that has vastly inspired me to make a project with a degree of hard work that would only befit their high standards and I must thank them. It is essential also that I thank the library staff and the IT section staff without whose help the project they would not have been finished in time. Lastly, let me thank all the authors, writers, columnist and social thinkers whose ideas and works have been made use of in the completing of this project Last but not the least, I also take this opportunity to thank all those people who contribute in their own small ways but fail to get a mention. We will write a custom essay sample on Life and Works of J.S. Mill: Project Report specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on Life and Works of J.S. Mill: Project Report specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on Life and Works of J.S. Mill: Project Report specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer OBEJECTIVESThe present project intends to study, analyse and explore the theoretical premises of John Stuart Mill. The main focus of this is to study the social and political objectives of Mill’s thought in the history of ideas and aims to evaluate Mill’s philosophy with specific reference to the context in which Mill lived and the historical factors that shaped Mill’s political ideas. The interpretation of Mill’s thought involves striking a balance between the text and the context, and relate to the core ideas of the Mill in present social and political context. Main objectives of the present project are: * To study the philosophy and political premises of Mill’s thought. To understand the ideological and philosophical basis of Mill’s political thought of John Stuart Mill. * To study the consequences of Mill’s political thought. * To study Mills contribution to the political thought and asses its relevance in the present social context. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This Research is descriptive and analytical in nature. Secondary and Electronic resources have been largely used to gather information and data about the topic. Books and other reference as guided by Faculty of Political Science have been primarily helpful in giving this project a firm structure. Websites, dictionaries and articles have also been referred.Footnotes have been provided wherever needed, to acknowledge the source. INTRODUCTION John Stuart Mill (1806- 1873) was the most influential political thinker of the nineteenth century. In his political theory, liberalism made a transition from Laissez Faire to an active role for the state, from a negative to a positive conception of liberty and from an atomistic to more social conception of individuality. While mill was a liberal, he could also be regarded at the same time as a reluctant democrat, a pluralist, a cooperative socialist, an elitist and a feminist. Mill’s transformation criticism of Benthamite utilitarianism was one of his greatest contributions to political thought.He regarded himself as peter who defied his master, for he argued that the principle of greatest happiness of the greatest number was defensible only if a distinction was made between happiness and pleasure. He also replaced the quantitative approach of Bentham by a qualitative one. Mill also convincingly argued for a defence of basic freedoms by law. The purpose of law was to maximise liberty, as it gave an opportunity for self realisation. He defended free speech and the right of individuality. Mill unlike many contemporary liberals, championed women’s rights, seeing sexual inequality as ethically and legally untenable. Mill updated Smith’s ideas in his Principle of Political Economy (1848).He not only defended Laissez Faire but also argued that a just and orderly economic development was possible if trade unions existed for that would restore a balance in the bargaining process between the capitalists and their employees. His concern for social justice was reflected in his proposal for redistribution, mainly by taxation. He ignored Ricardo’s labour theory of value, since price was determined by forces of demand and supply. LIFE SKETCH John Stuart Mill was born on Rodney Street in the Pentonville area of London, the eldest son of the Scottish philosopher, historian and economist James Mill, and Harriet Burrow. John Stuart was educated by his father, with the advice and assistance of Jeremy Bentham and Francis Place.He was given an extremely rigorous upbringing, and was deliberately shielded from association with children his own age other than his siblings. His father, a follower of Bentham and an adherent of associations, had as his explicit aim to create a genius intellect that would carry on the cause of utilitarianism and its implementation after he and Bentham had died. Mill was a notably precocious child. He describes his education in his autobiography. At the age of three he was taught Greek. By the age of eight he had read Aesops Fables, Xenophon’s Anabasis, the whole of Herodotus and was acquainted with Lucian, Diogenes Laertius, Isocrates and six dialogues of Plato.He had also read a great deal of history in English and had been taught arithmetic. At the age of eight he began learning Latin, Euclid, and algebra, and was appointed schoolmaster to the younger children of the family. His main reading was still history, but he went through all the commonly taught Latin and Greek authors and by the age of ten could read Plato and Demosthenes with ease. His father also thought that it was important for Mill to study and compose poetry. One of Mills earliest poetry compositions was a continuation of the Iliad. In his spare time, he also enjoyed reading about natural sciences and popular novels, such as Don Quixote and Robinson Crusoe.His fathers work, The History of British India was published in 1818; immediately thereafter, about the age of twelve, Mill began a thorough study of the scholastic logic, at the same time reading Aristotles logical treatises in the original language. In the following year he was introduced to political economy and studied Adam Smith and David Ricardo with his father, ultimately completing their classical economic view of factors of production. Mills comptes rendus of his daily economy lessons helped his father in writing Elements of Political Economy in 1821, as textbook to promote the ideas of Ricardian economics; however the book lacked popular support. Ricardo, who was a close friend of his father, used to invite the young Mill to his house for a walk in order to talk about political economy. At age fourteen, Mill stayed a year inFrance with the family of Sir Samuel Bentham, brother of Jeremy Bentham. The mountain scenery he saw led to a lifelong taste for mountain landscapes. The lively and friendly way of life of the French also left a deep impression on him. In Montpellier, he attended the winter courses on chemistry, zoology, logic of the Faculte des Sciences, as well as taking a course of the higher mathematics. While coming and going from France, he stayed in Paris for a few days in the house of the renowned economist Jean-Baptiste Say, a friend of Mills father. There he met many leaders of the Liberal party, as well as other notable Parisians, including Henri Saint-Simon.This intensive study however had injurious effects on Mills mental health, and state of mind. At the age of twenty he suffered a nervous breakdown. In chapter V of his Autobiography, he claims that this was caused by the great physical and mental arduousness of his studies which had suppressed any feelings he might have developed normally in childhood. Nevertheless, this depression eventually began to dissipate, as he began to find solace in the Memoires of Jean-Francois Marmontel and the poetry of William Wordsworth. Mill had been engaged in a pen-friendship with Auguste Comte, the founder of positivism and sociology, since the two were both young men in the early 1820s.Comtes sociologie was more an early philosophy of science than we perhaps know it today, and the positive philosophy aided in Mills broad rejection of Benthianism. Mill refused to study at the University of Oxford or the University of Cambridge, because he refused to take Anglican orders. Instead he followed his father to work for the East India Company until 1858. In 1851, Mill married Harriet Taylor after 21 years of an intimate friendship. Taylor was married when they met, and their relationship was close but generally believed to be chaste during the years before her first husband died. Brilliant in her own right, Taylor was a significant influence on Mills work and ideas during both friendship and marriage.His relationship with Harriet Taylor reinforced Mills advocacy of womens rights. He cites her influence in his final revision of On Liberty, which was published shortly after her death. Taylor died in 1858 after developing severe lung congestion, only seven years into their marriage. Between the years 1865-1868 Mill served as Lord Rector of the University of St. Andrews. During the same period, 1865-8, he was a Member of Parliament for City and Westminster,and was often associated with the Liberal Party. During his time as an MP, Mill advocated easing the burdens on Ireland and in 1866 became the first person in Parliament to call for women to be given the right to vote.Mill became a strong advocate of womens rights and such social reforms as labour unions and farm cooperatives. In Considerations on Representative Government, Mill called for various reforms of Parliament and voting, especially proportional representation, the Single Transferable Vote, and the extension of suffrage. He was godfather to Bertrand Russel. He died in Avignon, France, in 1873, where he is buried alongside his wife. MILLS VIEWS ON LIBERTY Mills Essay on Liberty is an English classic greatly revered by the world over which was compared to Milton’s Areopagities. No finer defence of liberty of thought and discussion has ever been written. Mill’s ideas on Liberty are closely related to the Doctrine of Utility of Happiness.To Mill there cannot be self development without Liberty. He argues that liberty is very necessary for the happiness of society but liberty cannot be expressed in terms of utility because it is more fundamental than utility. Mill was a strong champion of freedom of thought and discussion. It is intimately related to the development of individuality of men and women in the community. Because all wise and noble things come and must come from individuals. To mill there can be no self development without liberty. Liberty is very necessary for the happiness of society. Liberty implies the freedom of action. Mill divides liberty of action into two:- 1. Self regarding action 2. Other regarding actionsMill’s first definition of Liberty is that it is the Sovereignty of the individual over himself. It is being left to himself. Self regarding actions include those actions which relate to the individual himself performing them. The other regarding action includes those which affect others. Mill holds that the state should not interfere with safeguarding actions. However, Mill justifies the state interference with those other regarding action which produces positive, demonstrative harm to others. Mills whole view is non- utilitarian. Mill admits state interference to any extent provided it leads to social well being. Mills second definition of liberty is that Liberty consists in doing what one desires.This definition is apparently different from the first one as being left to oneself’. Mill says that you would be justified in preventing a man crossing a bridge that you knew to be unsafe. This second definition of liberty of Mill throws the doors open to any amount of interference. FREEDOMS OF THE INDIVIDUAL Mill pleads for certain freedoms for the individuals which are essential for the development of the personality of the individual in a proper manner. They include:- 1. Freedom of conscience 2. Liberty of thought and expression 3. Liberty of pursuits and tastes 4. Liberty of association 5. Liberty to purse his own vocation in life and 6.Liberty of religion and morals Of the above, he strongly advocated the liberty of thought and it expressions. Mills was of the view that democracy; public opinion and collectivism were dangerous to individual liberty and therefore must be kept within the sphere of activity. He felt that it was a bad tendency on the part of the society to impose its will on the individuals. Mills also stood for the liberty of the representatives of the people in the elected bodies. he asserted that they should not simply reproduce or echo people’s views, but should express their views independently and freely. Davidson summed up Mills theory of individual liberty fewer than three heads. 1.The advocacy of due recognition of the place and the importance of impulse and desire in man as a distinguished from intellectual, though enclose connection with the supreme head of amply acknowledging the active and energetic side of the individuals nature. 2. Insistence on the view that spontaneity of individuality is necessary ingredient in happiness or human welfare 3. Revolt against the conventionalist of society that hinder or seem to hinder the development and expression of individuality- against the despotism of social customs CRITICISMS OF MILLS VIEWS ON LIBERTY Thought Mill was considered as the champion of liberty of the individual, he owever criticised because he hedged his theory of liberty with my restrictions. 1. His doctrine of liberty applies only to matured beings. Exclusion of children and backward people and races from his theory of liberty in terms of enjoyment was not accepted. 2. Mills considered unlimited freedom of thought and expression as a necessary condition for the development of civilization but at the same time, he does not permit the same unlimited freedom to the individual in the realm of action as in the domain of thinking so, practically it amounts to futility. 3. The unfettered freedom of the individual leads to the rise in inequalities among men. 4.He is absence of restrains or freedoms to do what one desired. He is not consistent in his ideas. 5. Mills does not believe in the theory of natural right and he does not accept Bentham’s view that right are creatures of law and therefore of thee state. He also fails to establish a direct relationship between rights and duties. MILLS VIEWS ON REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT According to J. S Mills the best government is not the one which is most efficient but the one which serves as the best school of citizenship for imparting political education and training of the citizens. Such a government should promote virtue and intelligence of the people. Its value should not be judged in terms of its work.This means that the first criterion of a good government is the degree to which it tends to increase the sum of good qualities among the governed, collectively and individually more than the efficiency of its administration. In this connection, Mill considered the Representative Government as the best form of government. However it must be noted that Mills favoured Representative government only for advanced nation. He considered that it does not suit the backward and colonial people. Monarchy is best suited for them according to Mill. Mills holds that the first duty of any good government is to promote the virtue and intelligence of the people themselves.The main criterion of a good government is the degree to which it tends to increase the sum of good qualities in the government, collectively and individually rather than the efficiency of the government itself as an administrative body. Mills believes that in democracy there is adequate scope for the moral and intellectual development of people because work is done by their active participation and involvement. At the same time Mills was aware of the weaknesses and dangers of democracy. So Mill felt the need for intelligent and enlightened legislator’s i. e. those cultured men who specially studied politics and hold independent views and who serve people selflessly. For this he also suggests qualified franchise. Though all were to be given right to vote, he advocates weight age to the votes of those who had better abilities.Mills himself said that I still contend for assigning plurality of votes to authenticated superiority of education were it only to give public feeling irrespective of any direct political consequences. Mills was equally aware of the possibility of the educated class becoming tyrants by virtue of their plural votes. Mill did not favour the payment of any remune ration to the members of parliament, as membership of parliament is an honour and service to the people. He felt that non payment to mp secures efficiency, purity and economy. However, the MP’s should also not be economically inconvenienced. He went to an extent of saying that the election expenses of the candidates should not e a charge on the candidates himself. BALLOT SYSTEM Bentham and John Mill greatly supported the system of vote by ballot’, while J. S Mill condemned it.He considers that vote by ballot was wrong in principle because it makes the individual to feel that the vote is a right and not a trust, for him, vote was a trust and not a right and that the right to vote meant a great responsibility to be fulfilled not for any personal profit but for the common good. Mill argues that the voters should be given absolute secrecy in order to enable them to discharge their electoral functions efficiently. He was also aware about the malpractices done by the candida tes to induce them and tempt them for votes. But he felt that such a trend was on decline. Mill believes that the voters must be a learned individual as well as tax payer otherwise they would become irresponsible.Mills felt that universal education must precede universal suffrage. Regarding the functions of legislature, Mill prescribes that the legislatures should neither govern nor administer, but should only legislate. According to Mill The proper duty of representative assembly in matters of administration is not to decide them by its vote, but take care that persons who have to decide them shall be the proper persons. Mill also did not favour the ideas of election to parliament on annual basis nor did he like that the people of high calibre should be governed by the people of low calibre. Regarding the House of Lords, Mill wanted that it must be radically reformed. It should prove the need for its existence.The Lords must be entrusted with the responsibility of drafting the bil ls for legislation in view of their superior legal competence. However the rights of final revision must be vested in the commons only. Thus it is clear that Mill was an intellectual and a prophet of Representative Government who could also visualise its dangers. MILL AS A CHAMPION OF WOMEN’S RIGHTS J. S Mill was moved by the social and legal restrictions on women prevailing in his days. In the mid- Victorian age, the conditions of women in British society was very pathetic. The women were not allowed to take part in politics and high positions and jobs were also out of their reach. They were not even allowed to vote at elections.They were completely deprived of political role in the state. This induced Mill to advance his logic in support of women’s rights. Mill was of the view that women were subjected to inequalities and it is highly unjust and immoral to deprive them of their due opportunities. He said that birth cannot be the basis of excluding women by nature for a particular profession or job. However if women differ from men on grounds of sex, this distinction of sex should not be made as the basis of distinction everywhere. Mills regarded the participation of women in politics useful to the society. He felt that if equal opportunities are given to women on par with men, women will be benefitted.Society also derives the benefit by their contributions in view of their mental potentialities commensurate with social advancement. Hence, Mill argues that women should be freed. The higher education of women, the increase opportunities open to their talents and enfranchisement and opportunities to hold public office were chiefly his arguments in support of women’s rights. Mill also pleaded the cause of woman in British parliament. He also condemned the subjection of women to men. Mill was attacked vigorously by several quarters for his strong contention of emancipation of women. CRITICISMS ON MILL’S VIEW ON WOMENS RIGHTS 1. It is c riticised that Mills understanding of married life and conception of home is not adequate.Mills argues that, women should not be subjected to the authority of men is challenged, when Davidson says some kind of subjection is necessary in life, if society is to exist and go on at all and only that kind of subordination is reprehensible that is not founded on worthy superiority. 2. Mills forgets that command and obedience in a family is based not on force but on the union of hearts. Mill underestimated the role of the mother in a household and her vast nobility and her importance in upbringing of a family. 3. He also did not realise the vast magnitude to psychological differences between men and women. These natural differences cannot the obliterated by any amount of legislation. 4.It is also said that if the rights as recommended by Mill are granted to the women, they lead to calamity for the whole world as the revelation between men and women will radically change hence it is not de sirable. 5. Lastly it is also argued that if a woman jumps into the turmoils of politics of men, it would destroy their natural grace and attractive faculties and lead to tragedy. MILL’S VIEWS ON UTILITARIANISM Bentham and Mill have several things in common with regards to their philosophical orientation, although there is also a degree of difference between them. Benthams doctrine was the promotion of Greatest Happiness of greatest Number ’. He stood for the happiness of the individuals.Pleasure and utility are his guiding principles in determining every activity of the state or that of the individuals. In a few hands, Bentham’s doctrine of utility and happiness received criticisms. His philosophy was interpreted as debasing and degrading. The canonical statement of Mills utilitarianism can be found in Utilitarianism. This philosophy has a long tradition, although Mills account is primarily influenced by Jeremy Bentham and Mills father James Mill. Mills famous formulation of utilitarianism is known as the greatest-happiness principle. It holds that one must always act so as to produce the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people, within reason.Mills major contribution to utilitarianism is his argument for the qualitative separation of pleasures. Bentham treats all forms of happiness as equal, whereas Mill argues that intellectual and moral pleasures are superior to more physical forms of pleasure. Mill distinguishes between happiness and contentment, claiming that the former is of higher value than the latter, a belief wittily encapsulated in the statement that 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 fools, or the pig, are of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question. Mill defines the difference between higher and lower forms of happiness with the principle that those who have experienced both tend to prefer one over the other. This is, perhaps, in direct contrast with Benthams statement that Quantity of pleasure being equal, push-pin is as good as poetry, that, if a simple childs game like hopscotch causes more pleasure to more people than a night at the opera house, it is more imperative upon a society to devote more resources to propagating hopscotch than running opera houses. Mills argument is that the simple pleasures tend to be preferred by people who have no experience with high art, and are therefore not in a proper position to judge.Mill supported legislation that would have granted extra voting power to university graduates on the grounds that they were in a better position to judge what would be best for society. It should be noted that, in this example, Mill did not intend to devalue uneducated people and would certainly have advocated sending the poor but talented to universities: he believed that education, and not the intrinsic nature of the educated, qual ified them to have more influence in government. The qualitative account of happiness that Mill advocates thus sheds light on his account presented in On Liberty. As Mill suggests in that text, utility is to be conceived in relation to mankind as a progressive being, which includes the development and exercise of his rational capacities as he strives to achieve a higher mode of existence.The rejection of censorship and paternalism is intended to provide the necessary social conditions for the achievement of knowledge and the greatest ability for the greatest number to develop and exercise their deliberative and rational capacities MILLS CRITIQUES ON UTILITARIANISM Mills duty was to save Bentham’s philosophy from the attacks of the critics. J. S Mill a close follower of Bentham, he saved Benthamism just as Lenin made Marxism more practical and experimental. Mills wanted to strengthen the utilitarian concept of Bentham and of his father James Mill. So he thought it was necessar y to draw a distinction between the different kinds of pleasures. 1. Here he differs from Bentham and his father.To them, pleasures differ only in quality and one pleasure was good in itself as another. But J. S Mill held that pleasure differed not only in their quantity but also in their quality. There are higher pleasures and there are lower pleasures. 2. For Bentham he felt that pleasure is derived from within. For Bentham pleasure was the only cause and motive for individual’s actions. But Mills contends that individual pleasure does not give him maximum happiness, but it was the collective pleasure which affords him greatest happiness. 3. While Bentham conceived of utility as based on self regarding motives, Mill on the self and other regarding motives. J.S Mill does not agree with Bentham’s dictum that it is pleasure and not its source that matters. To Mill the source also matters. And quality also matters. 4. Bentham’s conception of utility was more polit ical than ethical. But to Mill, it was ethics that is more important in deriving pleasures. 5. Mills defers from Bentham regarding the concept of liberty. For Bentham utility consisted in the greatest happiness in the greatest number’ of the people. He believed that liberty had nothing to do with utility. However Mills was of a different view. To Mill, liberty was essential for utility and majority rights could be protected only when all the people enjoyed the liberty. 6.Further, Mill’s concept of liberty was non utilitarian in character. Bentham admitted only the external sanctions for forcing the individual to promote general happiness, where as Mills accepted both internal and external sanctions. 7. Finally Bentham did not favour plurality in votes to a particular section in society whereas Mill favoured it. Mill was of the view that the intelligent and experienced people must be given an extra vote. Bentham advocated individual happiness over general happiness, Mil l stood for collective happiness over individual happiness. Mills was a fanatic type of utilitarian. Mill was opening minded, socially spirited and intelligent.Mill had the respect for his father and for his teacher and therefore he did not outright discard and reject their ideas but tried to refine them, minimising the inadequacies and differences. CONCLUSION Mills efforts to revise and modify classical utilitarianism paved the way for many of the changes that were initiated within English political thought and practice his most important concern was the preservation of liberty within a democratic society as an intrinsic good in itself. And looked down on the majority tyranny and mass mediocracy as potent threats to individuality and liberty. Mills visualised the state as a moral institution concerned with the promotion of virtues and excellence in the individual citizen. He felt that a conception of good life was more important than a life devoted to the pursuit of pleasure.State was a product of wills and not of interest and contends that to ignore the state as constituted by humans will was fallacious. Mill a male philosopher of considerable stature and repute to consider the Woman’s Question. Mainstream thinkers had either ignored it altogether, usually endorsing the stereotype image of women. The Subjection along with his active support from the women played a pivotal role in advancing the women movement. Mills was neither an authentic individualist nor a genuine collectivist. In fact he was not considered in some quarters as a doctrinaire thinker at all. Between the Benthamite reform of the early decades of the century and the Fabian reform of the last decade, Mills stood at the dead centre, not firmly and steadily but doggedly.His commonsense led him to probe the implications of contradictory views which were the liberal stock of trade.