Philosophy of Mill on Principle of Liberty, Research Paper Example

There have been constant debates and issues concerning the issue of philosophy and politics. One of the philosophers who contributed and set forth to such ideas is John Stuart Mill and his Principle of Liberty. This paper sets to discuss his principle of utilitarianism and the how the Principle of Liberty and utility depend on one other to provide give happiness and good life.

In Mill’s Utilitarianism (PU), the basic principle is the achievement of greatest happiness by individuals by involving themselves in activities that creates such a condition. Therefore, Mill states that an action is termed right when it provides the greatest pleasure to the doer. Moreover, he continues to argue that each individual’s happiness is like any other person’s, and hence this is not a type of ethical egoism, as a person does not have to pursue his or her own needs to be happy (Tamburrini 5). Moreover, PU does not require an individual to promote the greatest good for the largest number of people, even though this is what should maximize the quantity of happiness. Although this utilitarianism establishes the gradation of wrong and right, it encourages people to engage in action, in regardless to their consequences to others, which provide the greatest utility. However, this does not mean that all the actions that provide general utility are the morally acceptable factors and many options in such a situation are available to result to more general utility than personal utility. Therefore, PU sets to encourage only personal utility or happiness in regardless of other people’s happiness. Mill also show that happiness is different from enjoying of good life as he states, “It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.”

The author interpretation of Mill’s utilitarianism is controversial with regard to other philosophers who for years have criticized Mill’s work on utilitarianism. In the article, Mill’s approach has been defended from criticism, by the author in several ways in accordance to Mill’s several topics on Utilitarianism. The article in interpreting the two principles adopted by Mill is of advantageous effects to individuals as the principle of utility that states the criterion for rightness of people’s action gives the characteristics of these actions, the second one, the principle of liberty, guides the activities to involve in, in securing what individuals value. The author in his support to Mill’s utilitarianism mainly in the principle of liberty that is intended to protect individual privacy, argues that although at some extent Mill’s seems wrong, he is right (Tamburrini 10-18). Although it paves ways for the intrusion by the authorities in private matter, it helps in the same protection of privacy in extreme extents as opposed to use of force by the authorities in dealing with these issues. The article, therefore, shows that liberty and utility are connected and have the overall good of individual happiness and pleasure in life without interference or intrusion of the authorities.

I agree with the author interpretation of the article as Mill believed in the notion that when people are controlled not to harm the others is good and not in any other ways that the state could impose to limit the liberty of the citizens. Limiting citizens from harming other, therefore, provide utility for all people. Therefore, principles of utility and liberty have applications to both the individual happiness and the societal happiness, as individual will enjoy good life in both cases from the state protection.

Works Cited

Tamburrini, Claudio. “What’s wrong with JS Mill’s “Harm-to-Others”-Principle?” Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 38.1 (2011): 1-26.