Mill and Barry on the Foundations of Liberal Rights

The Philosophers' Magazine 46:78-82 (2009)
Abstract
In On Liberty, Mill famously propounded a view of the good life as the autonomous life. On this view, it is crucial that people develop and exercise, to a high degree, their ability to reason independently about what to believe and what to aim at in life. It is also important that they be able to freely hold and express their beliefs and effectively act on their aims. As Mill put it: The mental and the moral, like the muscular, powers are improved only by being used. ... He who lets the world ... choose his plan of life for him has no need of any other faculty than the ape-like one of imitation. He who chooses his plan of life for himself ... must use observation to see, reasoning and judgment to foresee, activity to gather materials for decision, discrimination to decide, and when he has decided, firmness and self-control to hold his deliberate decision. And these qualities he requires and exercises exactly in proportion as the part of his conduct which he determines according to his own judgment and feelings.... It is possible that he may be guided in some good path ... without any of these things. But what will be his comparative worth as a human being? (p. 56). Two of Mill’s arguments for familiar liberal rights—which include children’s right to a decent education, freedom of conscience, freedom of expression, and freedom of association— appeal to this ideal of autonomy. First, these rights are generally crucial for establishing the conditions under which people can freely make up their own minds about what to believe and how to live, and to act accordingly. Second, a society that respected these rights would, Mill thought, be more likely to have a vibrant public culture, in which divergent opinions and lifestyles lead to a ‘generally high scale of mental activity’, which together ‘raise even persons of the most ordinary intellect to something of the dignity of thinking beings’ (p. 33).
Keywords John Stuart Mill  Brian Barry  Rights
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index Translate to english
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,365
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Stephen Nathanson (2005). John Stuart Mill on the Ownership and Use of Land. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 12 (2):10-16.
Deni Elliott (2007). Getting Mill Right. Journal of Mass Media Ethics 22 (2 & 3):100 – 112.
Alex Voorhoeve (2010). Erasmus. The Philosophers' Magazine 20 (48):98-100.
Alex Voorhoeve (2004). Erasmus. In Julian Baggini & Jeremy Stangroom (eds.), The Great Thinkers A-Z. Continuum. 98-100.
Alex Voorhoeve (2009). The Limits of Autonomy. The Philosophers' Magazine 46 (46):78-82.
Alex Voorhoeve (2003). The House That Jack Built. The Philosophers' Magazine 22 (22):28-31.
Alex Voorhoeve (2010). Erasmus. The Philosophers' Magazine (48):98-100.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-07-24

Total downloads

34 ( #43,083 of 1,089,105 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #69,981 of 1,089,105 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.