John Stuart Mill: neither society nor government should interfere with individual freedom

(written by lawrence krubner, however indented passages are often quotes). You can contact lawrence at: lawrence@krubner.com, or follow me on Twitter.

[Originally published on a weblog called “What Is Liberalism?”]

I don’t have much time to write today so I’m just going to post an excerpt from John Stuart Mill’s book On Liberty. I’m reading the Norton Critical Edition, printed 1975. In this book Mill makes the radical argument that neither society nor government should limit an individual’s freedom, save where an individual might cause harm to others. The most radical thing about this argument, to my mind, is that Mill makes no separation between “the private sector” and “the public sector.” He thinks both are equally wrong to interfere with a person’s individual freedom.

What follows is the nub of the argument, from Mill’s introduction, page 13 of my book:

There is a sphere of action in which society, as distinguished from the individual, has, if any, only an indirect interest; comprehending all that portion of a person’s life and conduct which affects only himself, or if it also affects others, only with their free, voluntary, and undeceived consent and participation. When I say only himself, I mean directly, and in the first instance; for whatever affects himself, may affect others through himself; and the objection which may be grounded on this contingency, will receive consideration in the sequel. This, then, is the appropriate region of human liberty. It comprises, first, the inward domain of consciousness; demanding liberty of conscience in the most comprehensive sense; liberty of thought and feeling; absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects, practical or speculative, scientific, moral, or theological. The liberty of expressing and publishing opinions may seem to fall under a different principle, since it belongs to that part of the conduct of an individual which concerns other people; but, being almost of as much importance as the liberty of thought itself, and resting in great part on the same reasons, is practically inseparable from it. Secondly, the principle requires liberty of tastes and pursuits; of framing the plan of our life to suit our own character; of doing as we like, subject to such consequences as may follow: without impediment from our fellow creatures, so long as what we do does not harm them, even though they should think our conduct foolish, perverse, or wrong. Thirdly, from this liberty of each individual, follows the liberty, within the same limits, of combination among individuals; freedom to unite, for any purpose not involving harm to others: the persons combining supposed to be of full age, and not forced or deceived.

No society in which these liberties are not, on the whole, respected, is free, whatever may be its form of government; and none is completely free in which they do not exist absolute and unqualified. The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Each is the proper guardian of his own health, whether bodily, or mental and spiritual. Mankind are greater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest.

Post external references

  1. 1
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0393092526/qid=1122661889/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/104-6532514-8491962?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
Source