Gear 1

Taylor Gear

Professor Denman

Phil 112

15 May 2019

Paper 3: On Liberty Critique

“He who knows only is own side of the case knows little of that”
~ John Stuart Mill

Introduction

Mill’s “On Liberty” focuses on social liberty and how we as a society should properly address it.

Mill believes that everyone should be allowed to their own opinion and that they shouldn’t be

chastised for it. An individual should have the freedom of speech, freedom to pursue what he/she

likes as long as it causes no harm to others, and the freedom to unite.

I agree with Mill in that people should have the freedom to do as they like, as long as it causes no

harm, and that they should not be judged for doing as they please. Some argue that we should

have laws against doing certain things and want to make laws banning people from doing things

they want. I strongly disagree with this and believe that Mill was correct in his position. First, I

will present Mill’s stance on social liberty and explain how it fits into society. Secondly, I will

refute any possible counter arguments one might have towards Mill’s reasoning and explain what

he means by “harm”. From this, we can come to understand why it is better for a society to let an

individual do as he pleases.
 Gear 2

Summary

Mill explains that by not letting people express their opinions, it suppresses society and opinions

that could be true. He believes that people should have the freedom to pursue what they like as

long as it causes no harm. He addresses several counter arguments that people have towards his

stance, such as how people think they have a duty to shut down what they thing is wrong and

will hurt mankind, how only bad men pervert society with false beliefs, and so on. Mill is able to

argue back against these statements by referencing some important figures such as Socrates and

Jesus Christ. Both who died for having different opinions and yet are considered some of

societies wisest and greatest figures. He addresses how as a society we are no longer allowed to

put someone to death for having a different opinion and that there will never be a way to

extinguish a differing opinion. Mill writes that without differing opinions we could never

actually know the truth and that no debate in society make us less knowledgeable. Mill ends with

saying it is not the law’s place to limit fair discussion amongst the people.

Critique

Social liberty is a beneficial thing to society that many people seem to doubt. People should be

given the freedom to do as they please as long as it causes no harm. May people want to limit the

freedom of others, but don’t realize that they are limiting their freedoms as well. Social liberty

benefits us as it makes us more diverse and welcoming to differing opinions. If we stay intolerant

of others and only argue with those we disagree with, then we never get a real understanding of

what is the truth. By restricting people of their rights, you silence an opinion that might in fact be

true.
 Gear 3

Nowadays, we are mostly able to use science to prove our facts and what we believe is to be the

truth. However, there are still people who disagree. For example, the anti-vaccination

community. Many of us believe them to be wrong and disagree with them, but many people fail

to actually prove a point when arguing with them. Instead, they call them hysterical or stupid, but

they never actually take the time to have a discussion to understand why they think that way and

then talk to them about the scientific facts. They are constantly dismissed and people don’t even

take the time to talk with them and try to prove to them why they might be wrong. Most of

society is like this today and has always been like this. We ignore differing opinions and don’t

listen to them. Even if we are right, why should we silence other opinions? Society should

engage in civil discussion as it makes us more tolerant and understanding of others. In a state of

social liberty, we would be able to engage in a more diverse society.

What most people who are against social liberty don’t seem to like is acts that are harming the

person who does them. Like smoking for example. People will shame others for smoking and say

how it will negatively affect them in the future. But why shouldn’t people have the freedom to

harm themselves if they want to? If you don’t like something, then you simply don’t have to do

it. Putting down others for doing something that you don’t like won’t benefit you in any way.

People should have the right to freely choose if they want to harm themselves, but they may not

have the right to harm others. Lifting a ban on certain things also doesn’t mean that society will

become chaotic. Many teenagers do illegal things out of an act of rebellion or to upset someone.

If you give people their freedom, sometimes the less likely they are to do the crazy things that

everyone else is doing.

 Gear 4

Just because someone think differently or wants to do things differently, doesn’t necessarily

make them a bad person. Plenty of people have actually been proven to be correct when they had

different opinions from the majority of the group. Even if they are wrong, does that make

someone a bad person? People tend to dislike others who have different political views from

them without ever even getting to know them. A lot of the time, what you’ll find is that if you

open up yourself to other people and listen to different views you become more understanding

and sympathetic. You don’t have to agree with them, but it’s good to see other points of view so

that you can widen your array of knowledge and get a better perspective on the world. People

often aren’t as bad as we make them out to be.

Another common argument about why we shouldn’t have social liberty is because of people who

might litter or if someone was to go outside and use the sidewalk as their bathroom. These are

things that we as a society look down upon. However, remember that Mill believes that it is okay

to do so as long as it causes no harm. We can argue that these two circumstances can cause harm.

It was never specified that harm is only to a person. Harm could be to a person, animal, the

environment, or any other thing. Littering is considered to be harmful to the environment,

therefore it would not be allowed to perform this kind of act. Any potential harmful act to

someone or something else would not be allowed to take place in a society of true social liberty

according to Mill. Therefore, there are still a few certain acts that would not be allowed in

society.
Gear 5