On Liberty: A Utilitarian Defense of Individual Freedom
On Liberty
Mill’s Argument for Freedom
In his seminal work, On Liberty (1859), John Stuart Mill addresses the crucial issue of individual freedom in the face of growing state power. Intended as a cornerstone of a larger, unrealized project, On Liberty presents a complex argument for preserving individual liberties within a societal framework.
Mill’s central concern lies in the potential for society, whether through public opinion, social pressure, or state intervention, to unduly restrict individual freedom. He argues that society’s only justifiable intervention in individual affairs is to prevent harm to others. Actions that solely affect the individual should remain free from societal interference, as individuals are sovereign over their own bodies and minds.
Challenges to Mill’s Approach
Mill’s approach faces several challenges. First, distinguishing between actions that solely affect the individual (self-regarding actions) and those that affect others (other-regarding actions) proves difficult. The line between these two spheres is often blurred, as most actions have indirect consequences for others.
Second, the distinction between public and private matters is not fixed but depends on prevailing moral norms, which can change over time. This subjectivity introduces ambiguity into the categorization of actions as self-regarding or other-regarding.
Conceptions of Freedom
Mill employs two conceptions of freedom: negative freedom, the absence of constraint, and positive freedom, the capacity for choice and self-development. He suggests that these two are linked, assuming that lack of societal interference naturally leads to individual growth. However, this assumption is questionable, as even in societies with significant individual freedoms, many individuals remain underdeveloped and unfulfilled.
Mill’s analysis overlooks the role of intermediate groups (communities, associations, subcultures) that mediate between individuals and society. While these groups can restrict individual freedom through integration and regulation, they also offer a wider range of choices than traditional societies.
Utilitarianism
The Pursuit of Happiness
Utilitarianism, a philosophy encompassing epistemology, sociology, and ethics, emphasizes the pursuit of happiness through actions that are beneficial. Jeremy Bentham, a key figure in utilitarianism, defined ethics as the art of maximizing happiness for members of society.
Utilitarianism has significant political implications, inspiring the Welfare State in the 20th century and influencing various social ideologies. As a bourgeois philosophy rooted in Enlightenment ideals, it views the world as an objective reality and emphasizes rational decision-making based on consequences.
Act and Rule Utilitarianism
Two main types of utilitarianism exist: act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism.
- Act utilitarianism: Happiness is maximized by analyzing each specific case without pre-set rules. Every action is judged based on its consequences.
- Rule utilitarianism: Universal criteria are applied to maximize pleasure for the greatest number. Actions are judged based on the overall consequences of a universally applied rule.
John Stuart Mill’s disagreement with his father on women’s suffrage illustrates the difference. James Mill opposed women’s suffrage on utilitarian grounds, arguing that it wouldn’t change election outcomes. John Stuart Mill countered that even if this were true, it violated women’s dignity, a rule essential for overall happiness.
Evaluating Pleasures
Mill, unlike Bentham, distinguished between the quantity and quality of pleasures. He argued that some pleasures, such as intellectual pursuits, are inherently more valuable than others. This qualitative aspect complicates the utilitarian calculus of happiness.
Utilitarianism and Human Dignity
Mill linked utilitarianism to human dignity, emphasizing self-development and individuality as essential for happiness. He argued that a society of passively obedient individuals cannot be truly happy, as happiness relies on diversity. Oppression, such as sexism, degrades both the oppressed and the oppressor by limiting intellectual and social growth.
Mill’s utilitarianism is not selfish, though it leans towards benevolence rather than altruism. He believed that individual actions should align with universal rules that protect the rights of others. Individuality, for Mill, must be balanced with loyalty to universally accepted rules.
Liberalism
Minimal State Intervention
Liberalism advocates for minimal state involvement in the economy and private life, emphasizing individual initiative and autonomy. It contrasts with socialism, which favors greater state control over the economy to ensure social welfare.
Liberals often defend their position with utilitarian arguments, claiming that a free market and individual initiative are more beneficial than centralized planning and bureaucratic control.
Characteristics of Liberalism
According to John Gray, liberalism has the following characteristics:
- Individualistic: Prioritizes individual rights over group needs.
- Egalitarian: Affirms the equal moral and social standing of all individuals.
- Universalist: Emphasizes the moral unity of humankind.
- Meliorist: Believes in social progress through criticism and reform.
Mill’s Liberalism
John Stuart Mill, while sympathetic to some socialist ideas, is often identified with liberalism due to his emphasis on individual initiative and limited state intervention. He believed that cooperatives could play a key role in regulating social relations.
Utilitarianism and Justice
Contrary to some claims, utilitarianism is compatible with justice. Utilitarian justice emphasizes impartiality, equality of interests, and equal consideration for all. However, it recognizes that equality is not the ultimate goal; diversity and individual development are also important. A just state, according to Mill, maximizes opportunities for creativity and diversity.
Criticisms of Utilitarianism
Despite its influence, utilitarianism has faced several criticisms:
- Problems in the utilitarian calculus of pleasure: Qualitative aspects of pleasure are difficult to quantify. Different types of happiness may be incomparable. Future pleasures are hypothetical and uncertain.
- Problems with justice: What is useful may not be just. Rule utilitarianism attempts to address this, but conflicts can still arise.
- Naturalistic fallacy: Mill may have conflated what is liked with what is desirable.
- Ethical minimum: Focusing on the lesser evil can lead to a gradual erosion of moral standards.
Utilitarianism has been challenged by Rawls’s theory of justice and communitarian critiques, which argue that its instrumentalist approach undermines collective life and overlooks the importance of shared virtues.