Utilitarianism and Liberalism in John Stuart Mill
Utilitarianism of John Stuart Mill
Utilitarianism equates pleasure, absence of pain, satisfaction, and happiness with what is useful. It proposes that society and the state should be governed by the principle of maximum happiness for the maximum number of people. This characterizes utilitarianism as both a politico-moral conception and a program of economic and social reform. Mill views the notion of the common good as achieving the highest possible amount of satisfaction and happiness for the greatest number of people. Consequently, matters of state must be judged from a utilitarian calculation that maximizes this sum. Mill justifies this with empirical psychology and the general desire for happiness.
In line with his notion of the common good, Mill establishes a hierarchy that places intellectual satisfaction, altruism, and emotional pleasures above vulgar and sensory pleasures. Utilitarianism suggests that the ideal is not just general welfare but also personal well-being. Humans often seek sensory pleasures even to the detriment of their health, despite knowing that health is a greater good. The utilitarian ideal aims to ensure not only the well-being of the individual but also the greatest total welfare. It affirms that true happiness only occurs within a context of general happiness.
The Economic and Social Reform
As a social philosopher, Mill considers the human misery derived from industrialization and the capitalist economy characteristic of his time in England unacceptable.
The mechanization of production was increasing exponentially. Crafts were being ruined because they could not compete in the new industrial market, and impoverished farmers were added to the mix.
Liberalism, which equated freedom with the total absence of laws and government intervention, was also challenged. Mill, in collaboration with his wife, authored a new form of political economy. This liberal approach advocated for a fairer distribution of wealth derived from social cooperation, without radically questioning capitalism. Mill defended the right to property and saw it as having both positive and negative aspects. Starting from the conquest and violence that often accompanied the acquisition of private property, he argued that individuals must be guaranteed the fruits of their own labor and protected from the hardship caused by others. Additionally, property, defined as an individual right to what is produced, is essential to the functioning of the economy and freedom.
Mill’s social reformism emphasizes solid cultural education and training as guarantees of the freedom that leads to happiness. These gifts of education foster the exercise of freedom, and power should rest on consensus and persuasion, not on fear and force.
Political and Moral Conception
Mill explored the nature and limits of the power that society can legitimately exercise over the individual, a vital question for the future. His political philosophy offers an almost exhaustive account of political freedoms that remain relevant to contemporary political philosophy, especially for the political liberalism of his time and the concept of an open society advocated for today.
Mill opted for politics and morality based on the fundamental value of individual liberties. He was an advocate of democracy for its educational value, as it allows for the development of individual freedom. He was also a declared protector of minorities, complementing the liberal government’s actions. A good government can only function within the context of a liberal society. While democracy has its flaws and shortcomings, these are best addressed through more democracy.
Mill presented his ideas to the Radical Party, of which he was the intellectual leader. He was intimately familiar with the intellectual objections, practical resistance, taboos, and conventionalisms that his proposals faced.
Freedom, a necessary condition for responsibility, can be revoked by both social inequality and political tyranny. In On Liberty, Mill states that the subject of his essay is social or civil liberty, that is, the nature and limits of the power that society can legitimately exercise over the individual. Humans have the capacity for self-improvement, and we become truly human by exercising our capacity for both good and evil.
Mill aimed to defend the right of every citizen to basic freedoms (speech, association), to peaceful protest, and to be free from reprisals for their choices (right to strike, religious freedom, educational choice, etc.). Legislative limitations on freedom could include compulsory education, suspending the right to vote for the illiterate, or prohibiting work beyond legally allowed hours. This defines the limit of state intervention in the personal realm.
There are many parallels between Mill’s positivism and utilitarianism. Both advocate for the elimination of differences between the sexes. They argue that it is unsafe to establish laws about human behavior and therefore impossible to make predictions. Behind this assertion lies Mill’s belief that humans are free and spontaneous, shaping their own character through interaction with others and making their own decisions.