J.S MILL'S "ON LIBERTY"

"ON LIBERTY"

J.S MILL WAS THE MOST ARDENT CHAMPION OF LIBERTY .HE HAS ELOQUENTLY DESCRIBED HIS THOUGHT IN HIS ESSAY -'ON LIBERTY'.IN THIS ESSAY,HE SOUGHT TO DEMONSTRATE THE DANGER TO WHICH INDIVIDUAL'S LIBERTY WAS EXPOSED  IN A DEMOCRACY .WHILE BOTH  BENTHAM  AND J.S MILL BELIEVED THAT DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT COULD ACT FOR THE GOOD OF THE WHOLE SOCIETY.

J.S MILL THOUGHT THAT DEMOCRATIC RULE WAS SYNONYMOUS WITH MAJORITY RULE,AND THAT MAY TEND TO OPPRESS MINORITIES.J.S MILL WAS INSPIRED BY THE WORK OF TOCQUEVILLE ,WHO OBSERVED

THAT WITH THE EXTENTION OF DEMOCRACY IN THE SOCIAL SPHERE THE SOURCE OF INTELLECTUAL AUTHORITY WAS FOUND IN PUBLIC OPINION I.E THE MAJORITY OPINION WHICH FURTHER LEADS TO "TYRANNY OF MAJORITY"                                                          

                                                                                                     MILL DEFINES LIBERTY OF INDIVIDUAL TO ENSURE THE FULLEST DEVELOPMENT OF HIS PERSONALITY .HE IDENTIFIES THREE AREAS IN WHICH LIBERTY OF INDIVIDUAL MUST BE PROTECTED.

1. FREEDOM OF THOUGHT AND EXPRESSION
2. FREEDOM OF ACTION
3. FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION

MILL RECOMMENDS FULLEST LIBERTY IN THE SPHERE OF THOUGHT AND EXPRESSION BUT ,HE PUTS SOME RESTRICTIONS IN THE SPHERE OF FREEDOM OF ACTION AND ASSOCIATION.

AS FREEDOM OF THOUGHT AND EXPRESSION BELONGS TO AN INDIVIDUAL'S INWARD DOMAIN OF CONCIOUSNESS. HE ASSERTS THAT IT IS ILLEGITIMATE INTERFERE WITH THE FREE EXPRESSION OF UNORTHODOX VIEWSPOINTS BECAUSE:

• IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE UNORTHODOX OPINION MAY BE TRUE WHILE ACCEPTED VIEWS MAY BE INVALID.
• IF WE ARE SURE THAT ACCEPTED OPINION ARE TRUE ,WE STILL OUGHT NOT TO SUPRESS THE CONTARARY OPINION BECAUSE THE FULL MEANING OF THE ACCEPTED VIEWSCAN BE UNDERSTAND ONLY WHEN IT GET CONFRONTED WITH OPPOPSITE VIEWS.
• FREE EXPRESSION OF CONTRADICTORY OPINION WOULD BE HELPFUL IN THE DESTRUCTION OF THE UNTRUE ELEMENTS OF OUR BELIEVES.

AS REGARD OF FREEDOM OF ACTION AND ASSOCIATION MILL PUTS CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS ON THESE FREEDOM SO THAT NO ONE IS ALLOWED TO HARM OR INJURE  ANY OTHER PERSON . HE DRAWS DISTINCTION OF TWO TYPES OF ACTIONS.

1. SELF-REGARDING:THIS PROVIDES COMPLETE FREEDOM OF CONDUCT FOR THE INDIVIDUAL IN ALL MATTERS NOT AFFECTING THE COMMUNITY.
2. OTHER-REGARDING :THE ACTIONS WHICH DO EFFECT THE COMMUNITY,MILL ARGUED THAT COMMUNITY HAS RIGHT TO COERCE  THE INDIVIDUAL IF HIS CONDUCT IS PREJUDICIAL TO ITS WELFARE.

BUT , THE STATE CAN INTERFERE IN SELF-REGARDING ,IF IT SEEMS INJURIOUS TO INDIVIDUAL ITSELF. THUS , THE STATE WOULD BE  PERFECTLY JUSTIFIED IF IT PREVENTS  A MAN  FROM CROSSING A BRIDGE WHICH IS KNOWN TO BE UNSAFE.

HEGAL ,T.H GREEN ARE THE CRITICS OF MILL'S SELF-REGARDING LIBERTY AS WHEN THEY SAY THAT NO LIBERTY IS SELF-REGARDING,IT INFLUENCE THE OTHERS IN ONE OR ANOTHER WAY. 
THOUGH HAVING CERTAIN FEATURES, MILL'S CONCEPT IS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME CRITICISM .
LIBERTY AND DEMOCRACY ARE AGAINST EACH OTHER.IT IS SAID THAT DEMOCRACY PROMOTES LIBERTY BUT, MILL'S LIBERTY IS CONTRADICTORY AS HE HAS SOUGHT TO TRANSFORM THE OLD , NEGATIVE VIEW O F LIBERALISM TO A NEW ,POSITIVE VIEW OF PHILOSOPHY OF CAPITALISM.

THUS,CONCLUDING THE WHOLE ASPECT OF 'ON LIBERTY'WE CAN SAY THAT HIS DISTINCTION OF LIBERTY AND DEMOCRACY CANNOT BE ACCEPTED AS DEMOCRACY IS ESSENTIALLY BASED ON THE FAITH IN EXTRAORDINARY POTENTIAL OF ITS PEOPLE .HOWEVER , MILL'S BRILLIANT IDEA HELPS TO IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF A DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENT.