John Stuart Mill: Liberty, Utilitarianism, and Induction
Mill on Knowledge and Induction
For John Stuart Mill, all statements expressing human knowledge of reality result from observation; that is, human logic is a logic of experience. Every statement is either empirical in origin or lacks validity.
Regarding the first principles of logic, Mill argued that the principle of contradiction is merely one of our earliest generalizations from experience. For instance, observing the mutual exclusion between rest and movement, light and darkness, or silence and sound leads to the generalization that a thing cannot simultaneously be something and its opposite.
Therefore, it is through observations of particular instances that we arrive at general or universally valid statements, all thanks to the mental induction process. We do not grasp essences directly, but the inductive process itself is based on experience. Regular sequences observed in nature through the senses lead to the notion of natural laws and the general principle of the uniformity of nature.
The statement “All men are mortal” is not the primary evidence that Socrates is mortal. Instead, our constant experience of humans dying naturally leads us to infer both the universal truth (“All men are mortal”) and the particular truth (“Socrates is mortal”) with equal certainty.
Induction: The mental operation by which we infer that what is true in one or more individual cases will also be true in all cases resembling the initial ones in certain determinable aspects.
Philosophical Context
Political Context: Liberalism and the Minimal State
The context for Mill’s philosophy includes his utilitarianism (moral and social philosophy) and liberalism (his political philosophy). His liberalism aligns with what is known as the minimal state theory, advocating for minimal state involvement in the economy and minimal state intervention in private life. Individuals should maintain the initiative and control over their own lives.
This contrasts with theories advocating for a maximal state, such as socialism, which believes the state should control the economy. These are sometimes called guarantor states because they guarantee certain rights.
However, this should not be inferred to mean Mill was excessively individualistic. He argued that laws and social arrangements should place the happiness or interest of each individual in harmony with the interests of society as a whole.
Scientific Context: Positivism
Mill’s thought was influenced by the prevailing science of his time: positivism. He believed human life is governed by two types of laws:
- Material laws (deterministic cause-and-effect)
- Psychological laws
Freedom exists as a concept because we can conceive of the logical and psychological necessity of both freedom and human diversity.
Mill’s Concept of Liberty
Philosopher Isaiah Berlin conceived of two types of liberty:
- Positive liberty: The capacity to carry out an action.
- Negative liberty: The absence of interference within a private sphere where each individual is the absolute master.
Mill primarily focuses on this second aspect, negative liberty, defining it as the space of one’s individuality and privacy. This sphere encompasses actions that do not harmfully impact others.
To possess this freedom, certain social conditions are necessary, particularly a system of public freedoms. Social freedom relies on the belief that society and the state respect the boundary between public and private life.
Mill believed human independence is absolute, comprehensive, and unconditional; neither the state nor public opinion should limit it arbitrarily. This doesn’t mean freedom has no limits, but rather that society has no right to dictate individuals’ private decisions as long as they do not affect the lives of other citizens.
Mill viewed human beings as inherently aiming to grow and develop.
Mill’s Utilitarian Ethics
Mill’s Utilitarianism should be understood as humanistic because utility, for Mill, is what enables humans to grow, develop, and create diversity. Humans seek goals (primarily happiness) and possess the will for self-transformation. Utilitarianism serves as a tool towards these ends, not an end in itself.
Mill advocated for utilitarianism because he believed social happiness aligns the interests of each individual with the interests of society. Greater collective happiness contributes to greater individual happiness.
Positive change in society, according to Mill, arises primarily through the actions of free individuals. His main objective was the progressive improvement of society driven by the actions of these free individuals.