John Stuart Mill's theory of justice has received less critical attention than many other features of his work, and yet it constitutes a crucial part of his project to rebut Kant's and other Continental thinkers' charge that British empiricism is incapable of cultivating a genuine morality. Here I explain that the problem of justice preoccupied Mill throughout his lifetime, and that wrestling with this question directly contributes to Mill building bridges between British empiricism's and Kant's conception of the moral conscience, (...) empiricism and romanticism's moral psychology, and empiricism's naturalized morality and Rousseau and Kant's separation of morality and nature. Mill's reflections on the character of justice also lead him to an ever more fundamental examination on the nature of liberty. (shrink)

Can the older, virtue-centred tradition of the ancients be made to mesh with the modern political, jurisprudential and economic focus on human equality and freedom? Can empiricism's grounding of human freedom in the natural right of each individual to secure his self-preservation and self-interest be reconciled with Kant's grounding of freedom in the capacity of human beings to act out of respect for the rational moral law? Mill thought so, and his work as a whole attests to the ambition and (...) comprehensiveness of such a task. The failure to recognize Mill's goal to heal the fundamental divisions of Western political thought contributes to commentators on Mill ignoring the broad range of Mill's contributions to political philosophy, such as his position on Plato and project to create a comprehensive morality for the future. More important, this void contributes to our missing the fuller, richer ideas of liberty and society that he intended. (shrink)

This chapter first explains Mill's analysis of Plato's teachings and his adoption and revision of Plato's dialectic for his own philosophic and moral project. Next, it offers an explanation of the continuities and differences between Mill and Aristotle in their respective conceptions of the task of cultivating a higher nature. Finally, it explains Mill's view of the different advantages and disadvantages represented by Athens and Sparta, which founded their respective regimes on distinct human needs – namely, creativity and social unity.

In _Reforming Liberalism_, Robert Devigne challenges prevailing interpretations of the political and moral thought of John Stuart Mill and the theoretical underpinnings of modern liberal philosophy. He explains how Mill drew from ancient and romantic thought as well as past religious practices to reconcile conflicts and antinomies that were hobbling traditional liberalism. The book shows that Mill, regarded as a seminal writer in the liberal tradition, critiques liberalism’s weaknesses with a forcefulness usually associated with its well-known critics. Devigne explores Mill’s (...) writings to demonstrate how his thought has been misconstrued--as well as oversimplified--to the detriment of our understanding of liberalism itself. (shrink)