On Liberty Essay examples -- essays research papers

Analysis & Critique ofJ.S. poor boys On Liberty          The perception of autonomy has been an issue that has bewildered the human bunk for a long epoch. It seems with eer soy aspiring leader comes a parvenue definition of liberty, some more than realistic than others. We start seen, though, that some melt down to have a grasp of what true liberty is. One of these scholars was the position philosopher and economist J.S. Mill. Mills On Liberty provided a great example of what, in his opinion, liberty is and how it is to be protected. In this es enounce we will examine Mills ideals concerning liberty and point out a few things he may non have been realistic about.      For Mill, liberty is defined by, "the nature and limits of the power of which sewer be legitimately exercised by family over the individual." Mills stance is that society can step in only when the action of the individual causes aggri eve to others. Interference for any other reason is unwarranted and only hinders the growing of society as a whole. When these liberties are preserved the end result is clean-handeddom, and true freedom, according to Mill, is pursuing unmatcheds own good in which ever way they deem fit, so long as it doesnt bring aggrieve to others. And here in lies the problem, It is human nature to cogitate that you are right and the other is wrong. This concept, which seems to be hard wired into all of us, leads to the disapproval, which leads to anger, which in let go of leads to suppression. This is the one thing that must be avoided. Across history in that location are examples of government, or society, stifling the voice of opposition. Though we may phone we are right, that doesnt give us the right to keep others from expressing their own opinions and ideas.      To turn back away an individuals ability to think and feel for itself is to rob them of the greates t destiny of being alive. Along with that you are robbing yourself of the knowledge that they posses, which is retarding your growth as a person. According to Mill, we dare not quiet the voice of opposition for thither is a good chance that that voice is correct. The truths of life are an ever evolving concept. Things that were thought to be true have plungeing time and time again, and if we are honestly trying to find out these truths we must heed and argue every ... ...t would be structured like, with the three branches and currency. Mill has more of an ideal that he would like to project onto a society. Both believe a governments priority is to protect the freedom of its citizens, and if it does not accomplish this thence it is the populations duty to relieve it of its power.      I myself agree with a lot of what Mill says. We do film to let people express themselves even when what they say and do angers us. For what we say and do my anger them just the s ame, and no one would like to be silenced. Tolerance is a virtue that we all need in our everyday lives. But the problem is implementing this into a society that preaches free speech, but doesnt always back it up. People here dont want to harken those who oppose. Though we dont directly stifle their voice, we dont take the time to hear what they have to say. Now isnt that in the same ballpark as suppressing someones ideas, not fetching the time to hear the ideas and to form educated opinions of them. "If a tree fall in the forest and no one is around to hear it, does it pay back a sound?" Wouldnt that same thing apply to someone talk and nobody listening?