Mill on Liberty Essay examples -- essays research papers

In Chapter 2, dweeb turns to the issue of whether tidy sum, either done their governwork forcet or on their avouch, should be exclusivelyowed to coerce or delimit anyone elses expression of opinion. tarry emphatically says that such actions are illegitimate. Even if however one person held a particular opinion, mankind would not be justified in silencing him. Silencing these opinions, Mill says, is wrong because it robs "the human race, posterity as well as the existing generation." In particular, it robs those who disagree with these silenced opinions. Mill then turns to the reasons why humanity is hurt by silencing opinions. His first motive is that the suppressed opinion may be consecutive. He writes that since human beingnesss are not infallible, they have no authority to decide an issue for all people, and to keep others from coming up with their own concepts. Mill asserts that the reason why liberty of opinion is so often in danger is that in practice pe ople tend to be confident in their own rightness, and excluding that, in the infallibility of the world they come in contact with. Mill contends that such confidence is not justified, and that all people are hurt by silencing potentially true ideas. After presenting his first argument, Mill looks at practicable criticisms of his reasoning and responds to them. First, there is the criticism that even though people may be wrong, they still have a duty to act on their "conscientious conviction." When people are sure that they are right, they would be dire not to act on that belief and to allow doctrines to be show that they believe will hurt mankind. To this, Mill replies that the only way that a person basis be confident that he is right is if there is complete liberty to contradict and repel his beliefs. Humans have the strength to correct their mistakes, but only through experience and discussion. Human judgment is valuable only in so far as people remain coarse to c riticism. Thus, the only time a person can be sure he is right is if he is constantly open to differing opinions there must be a standing invitation to try to disprove his beliefs. Second, there is the criticism that governments have a duty to uphold indisputable beliefs that are important to the well being of society. Only "bad" men would try to undermine these beliefs. Mill replies that this argument still relies on an given of i... ...s beliefs are not reflected in their conduct. As a result, people do not truly understand the doctrines they hold dear, and their misunderstanding leads to serious mistakes. Mill presents one possible criticism of this view. He writes that it could be asked whether it is essential for "true knowledge" for some people to hold erroneous opinions. Mill replies that having an change magnitude number of uncontested opinions is both "inevitable and indispensable" in the service of human improvement. However, this does not mean that the loss of debate is not a drawback, and he encourages teachers to try to compensate for the loss of dissent. Mill then turns to a fourth argument for freedom of opinion. He writes that in the case of unlike doctrines, perhaps the most common case is that instead of one being true and one false, the truth is somewhere between them. Progress unremarkably only substitutes one partial truth for another, the newer truth more suitable to the needs of the times. Dissenting or heretical opinions often reflect the partial truths not recognized in popular opinion, and are valuable for obstetrical delivery attention to a "fragment of wisdom." This fact can