Mill is discussed how society will judge even if the person is only doing harm to him or herself and wi... ... middle of paper ... ...ered enough, which is a huge objection to Mill’s argument. In conclusion, On Liberty, chapter four by J.S. Mill focuses on how each member of society should not harm others and how everyone is obligated to keep society safe maintaining a balance. In this chapter Mill reviews his ideas surrounding the “harm principle” and holding individuals accountable for their actions to others. He also argues in this chapter that society has the right to punish individuals who harm other members in society.
...cience?? He believed that conscience should tell a person what to do not just a majority vote. To follow a government blindly ruins people they should only trust what they believe is right. The use of civil disobedience is a respectable way of protesting a governments rule. When someone believes that they are being forced into following unjust laws they should stand up for what they believe in no matter the consequences because it is not just one individual they are protesting for they are protesting for the well-being of a nation.
He goes on to point out that the world would only be chaotic if there aren’t absolute monarchs. Hobbes believes man must establish the Leviathan by making a social contract and only then will the world run ideally. He considers the state of nature like the human body; the government being the head and the citizens being the body. The head is in absolute control but the body can still create harm on itself and the head but only if the head allows it. The people (the body) must give consent to the government to have absolute rule.
The power is held by those who are being ruled, and they have equal rights in deciding their political outcomes. Locke explains that “wherever law ends, tyranny begins”, so once the rights of the people are suppressed this injustice begins (Locke 102). Locke also explains that if a government was to act unjust, not with the best interest of the majority, then it is the right and the responsibility of the people to overthrow “tyranny” (Locke 102). The people, who have the power, should always defend their human rights, especially from unlawful rulers. This view of government shifts with Hobbes’ perspective.
Mill also thinks that we shouldn’t silence opinions because it is detrimental to society as a whole. To prove why it is detrimental to society Mill starts by arguing that no one or governing body should be able to restrict ones opinion on issues and that people should be able to come to their own conclusions on issues. Mill discusses the possible objections to his idea that freedom of speech and thought are necessary. There are four objections to Mills thoughts on silencing opinions that he responds to. 1.
This is a rather paradoxical argument as the idea of forcing someone to be free hardly works in most people’s definition of freedom. What is essential to remember here is that Rousseau believes that the true form of freedom can only come about once an individual enters civil society and accept the terms of the social contract. Therefore by forcing someone to adhere to society’s order, you are really granting them with civil freedom, the most important freedom of all.
Consent is necessary because for any government to exist individuals must voluntarily surrender some of the freedom they would possess if they existed in "a state of nature" Citizens will surrender some liberty to create a government that allows them to prosper. Citizens must agree with the actions of the government at all times, giving them the right to abolish governments that do not benefit them. Locke realized that this is impossible in any society of size so he relied on the idea of a "general will" as expressed by the majority. 3. Explain the impact of Locke & Rousseau on Thomas Jefferson.
It is based on this claim that he makes his argument that autonomy should be valued because it is the sole principle of our moral law. In On Liberty, Mill propounded that freedom was doing as one pleases, and unlike Kant promoted a personal account of autonomy wherein an individual is encouraged to decide for one’s self one what ever course of action they desired- often regardless of a particular moral. The good consequence of progress was the core reason that Mill felt that one should value this type of autonomy. To understand Kant’s account of freedom and autonomy one should have a general picture of his moral philosophy. A moral philosophy based so heavily on autonomy, that it if fair to establish that Kant’s morality and freedom reciprocally imply one another.
Mencius specifically thought that government should be responsible for their people, especially that profit should not be talked about before the concerns of the people. Mencius included the well-field system in his philosophy, which provided people with the ability to provide for themselves in a sufficient manner. Legalists like Han Fei Tzu believed that government was the way to correct people and that a rule through power and punishment would be able to create order and control during a warring time. He especially believes that scholars and education were the source of loss of control, due to the way in which education could lead to separation of one’s loyalty to the state (aka central government). As made self-evident, the attitudes, which Confucius, Mencius, and Han Fei Tzu maintain towards the ideas of education, rituals and government, shape the overall philosophies of each.
Thoreau came to conclusion that person should obey conscience rather than law in order to defend the justice and moral p... ... middle of paper ... ...clusion during understanding that each person take response of injustice of the laws and main problem lie in social omission and lack of personal interest to resistance for governmental unjust policy. Therefore, society must use non-violent resistance against injustice through civil disobedience, because the society through their actions and inactions sharing responsibility for any actions of the state, including unjust actions. Works Cited Dictionary. 2011. 26 October 2011.