John Stuart Mill

English philosopher

• Born: May 20, 1806
• Birthplace: London, England
• Died: May 7, 1873
• Place of death: Avignon, France

Desiring the greatest possible happiness for individual men and women and an England of the greatest possible justice and freedom, Mill questioned all assumptions about knowledge and truth and made observations the starting point of his discussions.

Early Life

John Stuart Mill was the eldest of nine children born to James Mill and Harriet Burrow. His father, the son of a shoemaker, was helped by a patron, Sir John Stuart, to attend the University of Edinburgh, where he studied philosophy and divinity. He qualified for a license to be a preacher but soon lost his belief in God. In 1802, in the company of Sir John Stuart, who was then a member of Parliament, James Mill went to London to earn his living as a journalist.

Two years after the birth of his son, John Stuart Mill, James Mill began his association with Jeremy Bentham, twenty-five years older and the founder of the ethical theory of utilitarianism. James Mill became Bentham’s disciple and the principal disseminator of utilitarianism; along with free trade, representative government, and the greatest happiness of the greatest number, another major belief of utilitarianism is that through education the possibilities for improving humankind are vast. The association between James Mill and Bentham, therefore, was to have a profound effect on the childhood, and indeed on the entire life, of John Stuart Mill, for he became the human guinea pig upon whom Bentham’s ideas on education were acted out. Under the direction of his father, John Stuart Mill was made into a Benthamite—in John’s own words, “a mere reasoning machine.”

James Mill began John’s education at the age of three, with the study of Greek, and it was not long before the boy was reading Aesop’s Fables. By the time he was eight and began the study of Latin, he had read a substantial body of Greek literature, including the whole of the historian Herodotus and much of Plato. In the opening chapter of his autobiography (begun in 1856 but published posthumously in 1873), Mill gives a detailed account of his prodigious feats of reading. Much of his studying was done at the same table at which his father did his writing.

On the morning walks on which he accompanied his father, Mill recited the stories about which he had read the day before. In the Autobiography, he states: “Mine was not an education of cram. My father never permitted anything which I learnt to degenerate into a mere exercise of memory.” The purpose of the education was to develop the greatest possible skills in reasoning and argumentation. Those skills then were to be used for the improvement of humanity.

In the year of John’s birth, James Mill began to write a work that would be eleven years in the making, his History of British India (1817). In the Autobiography , John tells of his part in the making of that formidable work, reading the manuscript aloud while his father corrected the proof sheets. He goes on to say that the book was a great influence on his thinking. The publication of the History of British India led directly to James Mill’s appointment to an important position in the East India Company, through which he was able to have a considerable impact upon the behavior of the English in India.

The final episode in James Mill’s education of his son was the work they did with David Ricardo’s treatise On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation (1817). On their daily walks, the father gave lectures to the son drawn from Ricardo’s work. On the following day, the son produced a written account of the lecture, aimed at clarity, precision, and completeness. From these written accounts, James Mill then produced a popularized version of Ricardo, Elements of Political Economy (1821); this exercise in the thinking of Ricardo also formed the basis of one of John Stuart Mill’s great works, the Principles of Political Economy (1848). When he and his father finished with Ricardo, John was fourteen and was allowed to be graduated from James Mill’s “academy.”

John then spent a year living inFrance with Samuel Bentham, brother of Jeremy. When he returned to England, he began the study of law with John Austin, a lawyer who was a friend of his father and Bentham. It was during this period that Mill had one of the greatest intellectual experiences of his life, the reading of one of Bentham’s great works, which, edited and translated into French by Bentham’s Swiss disciple Étienne Dumont, has come to be known as the Traité de législation civile et pénale (1802). Mill was exhilarated by Bentham’s exposure of various expressions, such as “law of nature” and “right reason,” which convey no real meaning but serve to disguise dogmatisms.

Mill also was greatly impressed by the scientific statement in this work of the principle of utility. Reading Bentham’s statement of the principle “gave unity to my conceptions of things.” Mill says in the Autobiography that at this time all of his ideas came together: “I now had opinions; a creed, a doctrine, a philosophy.” He had been transformed: “When I laid down the last volume of the Traité, I had become a different being.”

In 1823, James Mill obtained for his son a position in the same department as the one in which he worked at the East India Company. For the next thirty-five years of his life, John Stuart Mill worked in the office of the Examiner of India Correspondence. This was for Mill his “professional occupation and status.” He found the work wholly congenial and could think of no better way to earn a steady income and still be able to devote a part of every day to private intellectual pursuits.

Life’s Work

It was in the London and Westminster Review, founded by Bentham, that Mill’s first writings of significance appeared in 1824 and 1825. Among others were essays on the mistaken notions of the conservative Edinburgh Review and on the necessity of absolute freedom of discussion. In 1826, however, at the age of twenty, Mill became seriously depressed and experienced what has come to be known as his “mental crisis,” a period in his life discussed in detail in the Autobiography. Mill explains that at the age of twenty he suddenly found himself listless and despairing and that he no longer cared about the purpose for which he had been educated. He had to confess to himself that if all the changes in society and in people’s attitudes were accomplished for which he, his father, and Bentham were working, he would feel no particular happiness. He had been taught that such accomplishments would bring him great happiness, but he realized that on a personal level he would not care. Thus, he says, “I seemed to have nothing to live for.”

The Autobiography tells of his dramatic recovery. He read of a boy who, through the death of his father, suddenly had the responsibility for the well-being of his family thrust upon him. Feeling confident that he was capable of doing all that was expected of him, the boy inspired a similar confidence in those who were dependent on him. Mill claimed that this story moved him to tears: “From this moment my burden grew lighter. The oppression of the thought that all feeling was dead within me, was gone. I was no longer hopeless: I was not a stock or a stone.”

Mill added that he learned two important things from his mental crisis. First, asking whether you are happy will cause you to be happy no longer. Second, stressing right thinking and good behavior is not enough; one must also feel the full range of emotions.

It is thought that the intensity of his relationship with his father was the main cause of Mill’s crisis. He adored and worshiped James Mill, and thus found it impossible to disagree with him. In recognizing the value of feeling, however, the son was rejecting his father’s exclusion of feelings in determining what is desirable. As John came out of his depression, he let himself take an interest in poetry and art; William Wordsworth’s poetry was a medicine to him, bringing him joy, much “sympathetic and imaginative pleasure.” He was further helped in his emotional development with the beginning, in 1830, of his platonic love affair with Harriet Taylor and, in 1836, by the death of his father.

In 1830, Mill began to commit to paper the ideas that were to go into his first major work, A System of Logic (1843). Mill had come to believe that sound action had to be founded on sound theory, and sound theory was the result of sound logic. He was aware of too much argumentation that was not based on clear thinking; in particular, what were no more than habitual beliefs were frequently represented as truths. The subtitle of A System of Logic helps to explain Mill’s intention: “Being a Connected View of the Principles of Evidence and the Methods of Scientific Investigation.”

Although Mill and the utilitarians regarded experience or observation as the exclusive determinant of truth, of considerable influence in both Great Britain and on the Continent were those who believed that truth could be known through intuition. Those who started with intuition, Mill believed, started with nothing more than prejudices, and these prejudices then provided justification for untrue doctrines and harmful institutions. In A System of Logic, Mill attempted to combat what he considered prejudices with philosophy by establishing a general theory of proof. Insisting that “facts” were facts only if they could be verified by observation, Mill argued the necessity of ascertaining the origins of individual ideas and belief systems.

The publication of A System of Logic established Mill as the leader of his school of thought, now known as Philosophical Radicalism. A System of Logic became the most attacked book of its time, and Mill responded by revising to take account of the attacks; over the remaining thirty years of his life, Mill took the book through eight editions. His response to the criticisms of Principles of Political Economy was similar; he saw that treatise through seven editions.

As A System of Logic was an attempt to overthrow the dominance of the intuitionalists, Principles of Political Economy was an attempt to liberate economic thinking from his own utilitarian predecessors, especially his father and David Ricardo. In the preliminary remarks, Mill says:

It often happens that the universal belief of one age of mankind—a belief from which no one was, nor without an extraordinary effort of genius and courage, could at that time be free—becomes to a subsequent age so palpable an absurdity, that the only difficulty then is to imagine how such a thing can ever have appeared credible.

By 1848, the descriptions of economic activity by his predecessors had gained the status of natural law among the newly dominant middle class; to behave otherwise than to sell as dearly as possible and to buy as cheaply as possible, including human services, was to violate natural law. Mill thought it necessary to consider the effects of economic behavior on individuals and on society. He refused to accept the idea that there must be no interference with the playing out of economic forces.

Unlike his predecessors, Mill saw feasible alternatives to the system of laissez-faire and private property. He refused to accept the idea that there was nothing to be done about the suffering and injustices wrought by the system. He could not passively accept a system in which remuneration dwindles “as the work grows harder and more disagreeable, until the most fatiguing and exhausting bodily labour cannot count with certainty on being able to earn even the necessaries of life.” He would consider communism as an alternative if there were no possibility of improving the system then at work. He insists, though, that a comparison with communism must be made “with the regime of individual property, not as it is, but as it might be made.” Thus, Mill comes to advocate that the “Non-Interference Principle,” sacred to his predecessors, must not be regarded as inviolable.

One of the markets in which interference by government is justified is education, which, as governed by the free market, was to Mill “never good except by some rare accident, and generally so bad as to be little more than nominal.” However, education is the key to elevating the quality of life, for well-educated persons would not only understand that true self-interest depends upon the advancement of the public interest; they also would be thoroughly impressed with the importance of the population problem. Mill was a whole-hearted Malthusian and believed that there could be no permanent improvement of society unless population be under “the deliberate guidance of judicious foresight.”

Another of the many high points of Principles of Political Economy is the chapter on the stationary state, in which Mill rejects the desirability of indefinitely pursuing higher rates of economic development. Mill was “not charmed with the ideal of life held out by those who think that the normal state of human beings is that of struggling to get on, that the trampling, crushing, elbowing, and treading on each other’s heels are the most desirable lot of human kind.” The ideal economic state of society for Mill is that in which “no one is poor, no one desires to be richer, nor has any reason to fear being thrust back, by the efforts of others to push themselves forward.”

On Liberty (1859) is one of the most influential works in all of Western literature. It is a justification of the value of individuality, to the individual and to the individual’s society. Written during a period of rigid, although informal, social control, On Liberty is an encouragement for the individual to do and say whatever he or she wishes to do or say. The work consists of five chapters, the first of which is a history of the contention between civil liberty and authority. The objective of this introductory chapter is to show that whereas limiting political tyranny used to be a foremost goal, in his own time and country it is the tyranny of public opinion that must be withstood and limited. The tyranny of the majority is an evil against which society must guard, for the tendency of the majority is to coerce others to conform to its notions of proper behavior and right thinking. Mill asserts that the “engines of moral repression” are growing and that a “strong barrier of moral conviction” must be raised against them.

In the chapter “Of the Liberty of Thought and Discussion,” Mill argues the necessity of providing freedom for the expression of any and all opinions. Preventing an opinion from being expressed is an evil act against all humanity; even if the opinion happens to be false, the truth could be strengthened by its collision with the false opinion. If, however, the silenced opinion happens to be true, an opportunity to move toward truth has been lost. Only when it is possible to hear one’s own opinions contradicted and disproved can one feel confidence in their truth. Throughout history, the most eminent of persons have believed in the truth of what turned out to be foolish notions or have engaged in conduct that later appeared to have been irrational. However, progress has been made; fewer people are prone to holding foolish opinions and behaving irrationally. That has happened because errors are correctable. People learn from experience, but they also learn from discussion, especially discussion on how experience is to be interpreted. “Wrong opinions and practices gradually yield to fact and argument: but fact and argument, to produce any effect on the mind, must be brought before it.”

“Of Individuality, As One of the Elements of Well-Being” is perhaps On Liberty’s most potent chapter. In it, Mill argues that both the highest development of the individual and the good of society require that the individual human being be free to express his or her individualism. Mill regards individuality as a “necessary part and condition” of civilization, instruction, education, and culture. Different modes of living need to be visible in a society; where there is no individuality, there is no impetus for either other individuals or the society as a whole to improve. The visible individuality of some forces others to make choices, and it is only in making choices that various human faculties are developed—“perception, judgment, discriminative feeling, mental activity, and even moral preference.”

Where there are no opportunities to choose, the feelings and character are rendered “inert and torpid, instead of active and energetic.” Human beings must be free to develop themselves in whatever directions they feel the impulse, and the stronger the impulses the better. Should eccentricity be the result, then it should be remembered that “the amount of eccentricity in a society has generally been proportional to the amount of genius, mental vigor, and moral courage which it contained.” The chief danger of the time is that so few dare to be eccentric. “Every one lives as under the eye of a hostile and dreaded censorship.” This suppression of individuality can make a society stagnant.

Soon after the appearance of On Liberty, Mill began work on Utilitarianism (1863). About half the length of the former, it is, despite its title, a great humanistic work. Mill stretches Bentham’s very limited concept of human motivation from the absolutely egotistic or selfish to include the altruistic. Bentham believed that experiences fell into one of two categories, pleasurable or painful, and that within each category there were quantifiable differences in such qualities as intensity and duration; Mill believed that in regard to pleasure there are two different kinds, higher and lower. The higher pleasures, which include knowledge, the experience of beautiful objects, and human companionship, Mill asserts, are more valuable than the lower, animal pleasures. Mill felt it necessary to make this distinction because whenever he came across the term “utilitarianism” the term seemed to sanction the lower pleasures and excluded the higher. Mill wished to rescue the term from the “utter degradation” into which it had fallen.

Rather than encouraging degradation, utilitarianism encourages the development of nobility. Truly noble persons always have the effect of making other people happy. Utilitarianism, therefore, could only attain its end—the greatest happiness of the greatest number—through the general cultivation of nobleness of character, not selfishness. Indeed, Mill insists,

In the golden rule of Jesus of Nazareth we read the complete spirit of the ethics of utility. To do as you would be done by, and to love your neighbor as yourself, constitute the ideal perfection of utilitarian morality.

Doing as one would be done to is at the heart of Mill’s discussion of relations between the sexes in The Subjection of Women (1869). Centuries-old customs and laws have subordinated women to men, but the test of true virtue is the ability of a man and woman to live together as equals. One reason why they often do not is that the law favors men. That is seen particularly when the law returns women to the custody of the very husbands who have physically abused them. Another reason they do not usually live together as equals lies in what women are taught is proper behavior toward men. Women are taught to be submissive and to make themselves attractive, but men are not taught to behave similarly toward women.

Such an imbalance in the way men and women relate to each other is doomed: “this relic of the past is discordant with the future and must necessarily disappear.” Throughout his life, Mill sought equality and justice for women, not only because he believed strongly in the abstractions “equality” and “justice” but also because he believed that equality and justice in their relationships would improve and make happier both men and women. Mill’s last years were devoted to public service. A few months before his death he was involved in beginning the Land Tenure Reform Association, for which he wrote in The Examiner and spoke publicly. Mill died at Avignon on May 7, 1873.

Significance

In the nineteenth century, John Stuart Mill was England’s most thoughtful and most wide-ranging writer on the subjects of how truth could be determined, what was good for the individual human being, and what was good for society as a whole. As a result of his consideration of these questions, he is known as a great champion of fundamental civil liberties and an opponent of all forms of oppression. He is one of the two great defenders in English, along with John Milton, of the necessity of the freedoms of thought, expression, and discussion.

For the most part, Mill’s discussions in print are dispassionate and disinterested; he sincerely sought knowledge and truth, regardless of the sources from which ideas came. Without preconceptions of how it must have been, he sought to understand the past. Without contempt, he listened to and read his philosophical opponents in order to find and make use of whatever germs of truth there might be in their positions. He was always open to modifying and correcting what he had said previously. Aware of the brutality in humankind’s past, he was never cynical about human nature nor pessimistic about humanity’s long-term future.

Mill was optimistic about the desire and capacity of men and women to make themselves better persons, not all people certainly, but enough to have the net effect of improving society. He respected the complexity of human nature and human behavior. Never quick to rush to judgment, he saw that even an immoral action might have a sympathetic side or have qualities of beauty to it. John Stuart Mill was a very wise man, the nineteenth century’s Socrates. Generations of students have been nourished on his works, and rightly so.

Bibliography

Capaldi, Nicholas. John Stuart Mill: A Biography. New York: Cambridge U P, 2004. Print. Biography focusing on Mills’s intellectual development. Traces the influences in Mills’s life that contributed to his philosophy.

Ellery, John B. John Stuart Mill. New York: Twayne, 1964. Print. A book of one hundred pages that efficiently highlights and connects “the rare spirit of the man,” the ideas of the man, and the spirit and ideas of the age in which he lived.

Glassman, Peter. J. S. Mill: The Evolution of a Genius. Gainesville: U of Florida P, 1985. Print. A fascinating analysis of Mill’s life and writings from a psychoanalytic point of view. Glassman argues that long into adulthood Mill was struggling to repair the damage done to his emotional life and imagination by his father’s domination.

Levin, Michael. J. S. Mill on Civilization and Barbarism. London: Routledge, 2004. Print. Examines Mills’s ideas of the stages leading from barbarism to civilization, his belief in imperialism as part of the civilizing process, and his thoughts on the blessings and dangers of modernization.

Mazlish, Bruce. James and John Stuart Mill: Father and Son in the Nineteenth Century. New York: Basic, 1975. Print. A very thorough discussion of the entangled personalities and ideas of the two Mills.

Mill, John Stuart. Essays on Politics and Culture. Edited by Gertrude Himmelfarb. Garden City: Doubleday, 1962. Print. Contains eleven lesser-known essays, including the two seminal works “Bentham” and “Coleridge.” In a twenty-page introduction, Himmelfarb discusses Mill’s “peculiar brand of conservatism.”

Mill, John Stuart. John Stuart Mill: A Selection of His Works. Edited by John M. Robson. New York: Odyssey, 1966. Print. Contains all of On Liberty and Utilitarianism; selections from the Autobiography, A System of Logic, and The Subjection of Women; and passages from eighteen other essays. Robson’s twenty-page introduction is excellent.

Packe, Michael St. John. The Life of John Stuart Mill. London: Seckar and Warburg, 1970. Print. Especially good on Mill’s relationship with Harriet Taylor, the woman with whom Mill had a platonic love affair for twenty years while she was married and whom he married in 1851, two years after her husband’s death.

Robson, John M. The Improvement of Mankind. Toronto: U of Toronto P, 1968. Print. A comprehensive examination of Mill’s social and political thought by a sympathetic critic who writes excellent prose.

Ryan, Alan. J. S. Mill. London: Routledge, 1974. Print. Focuses on seven of Mill’s major works; summarizes them and relates them to the issues of the time that gave Mill the impetus to write.

West, Henry R. An Introduction to Mill’s Utilitarian Ethics. New York: Cambridge U P, 2004. Print. An interpretation of Mills’s essay on Utilitarianism.