100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
IB Philosophy Essay: Chapter 4 (21/25) £16.30   Add to cart

Exam (elaborations)

IB Philosophy Essay: Chapter 4 (21/25)

 6 views  0 purchase
  • Module
  • Institution

- IB paper 2 philosophy essay on John Stuart Mill's 'On Liberty' (Chapter 4) - Grade 7 essay (21/25)

Preview 1 out of 4  pages

  • December 31, 2023
  • 4
  • 2023/2024
  • Exam (elaborations)
  • Questions & answers
  • Secondary school
  • 5
avatar-seller
Part A: Discuss (explain & explore) Mill’s distinction between sanction and persuasion,
between coercion and free choice, ultimately between rules of law and rules of opinion
[10]

John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty grapples with a fundamental question in political philosophy:
the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the
individual. Mill approached this issue through utilitarianism in its “largest sense” – indirect
utilitarianism - seeking to prove that utility can be sufficient grounds for the coherent and
cogent arguments for negative liberties and rights, best understood as freedom from
government or societal interference. In the previous three chapters, Mill extended the
liberty of the individual – freedom of opinion and thought, and freedom of action – to its
limit, via appealing to the Harm Principle. In Chapter 4, however, Mill now returns to a more
detailed and systematic examination of the Harm Principle itself. With precision, Mill now
must differentiate between self-regarding and other-regarding actions – hitherto,
individuals are free to engage in self-regarding acts irrespective of their improperness,
however, a societal interference may be imposed, provided it is compatible with utility,
when other-regarding actions harm the ‘rights-based interests’ of others.

Mill commences the chapter by claiming that in return for the valuable general security with
society provides, individuals have a duty to obey the rules of other-regarding conduct. Mill,
however, argues for this on a utilitarian basis, and does not advocate for a social contract.
These rules, or conditions that society was allowed to impose upon the individual, include:
not injuring the interests of another – “certain interests, which either by express legal
provision or by tacit understanding, ought to be considered as rights”, bearing one’s share
of the “labours and sacrifices incurred for defending society or its members from injury and
molestation”, and ensuring that one refrains from hurting others even if not to the full
extent of violating their constituted rights, as this may be punished by opinion, though not
the law. Mill, therefore, has differentiated between acts subject to the rules of law, and
those subject to the rule of opinion: acts that violate one’s constituted [legally protected]
rights ‘ are subject to the former, and those that do not, are subject to the latter.

Society, therefore, had jurisdiction over any part of one’s conduct which prejudicially
affected the interests of others, yet Mill reaffirmed that if an action was self-regarding, the
individual enjoyed ‘perfect freedom’, and total ‘free choice’, from all forms of coercion -
that is, from the rules of law and opinions (legal and social measures).

Perhaps in response to the communitarian viewpoint, Mill then declares that his doctrine
doesn’t espouse “selfish indifference”, where it is assumed that humans have no business
with each other’s conduct in life, or where they do not care for the well-being of another.
His doctrine, instead, propounds “disinterested benevolence”, where one, through
“disinterested exertion” promotes the good of others – which is necessary to the self-
development and character formation that his overall project addresses - through
encouragement, yet not compulsion. Mill’s ‘disinterested’ exertion, therefore, propounds
persuasion, but not coercion.

It is here where Mill distinguishes artificial and natural penalties; artificial penalties are
deliberately inflicted on the individual due to his “moral vices” that subject others to harm,

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller RichardG. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for £16.30. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

75632 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now

Start selling
£16.30
  • (0)
  Add to cart