Liberalist philosopher, John Stuart Mill, set out his defence on the presumption in favour of freedom in arguably one of his most famous works, On Liberty (Hoffman & Graham 2006, p.38). There, he formulated what he identified as “a very simple principle” (Hampsher-Monk 2015, p.526):
The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection, that the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. (Mill & Himmelfarb 1977).
This is now referred to as the “harm principle”,
…show more content…
It follows, that the state should not lawfully exercise power to avert harms that an individual inflicts upon him or herself (Gostin & Gostin 2009). Moreover, it is based on the liberal consensus that autonomous persons know what is in their best interest, and should therefore be free from paternalistic interventions that prevent them from pursuing any form of self-regarding behaviour (Gostin & Gostin 2009). Although, Mill dictates an exception that children, whom have not yet developed their intellectual and moral capacities, as the only category of individuals that can be subjected to paternalistic regulation (Hoffman & Graham 2006). Arguably in this sense, mandatory vaccination schemes possess a paternalistic quality as they impose marked disincentives for a failure to comply with mass immunisation programs. In fact, much of the modern day public health regulations operate outside the permissible boundaries of the Millian principle, in safeguarding the health and safety of the population (Gostin & Gostin 2009). It is perhaps for this reason then that many contemporary liberals struggle with the inflexibility of the harm principle. Particularly regarding the misplaced anti-paternalistic view of mandatory vaccination schemes from an entirely individualist perspective, rather than considering an individual’s place and effect within a wider society. Moreover, Gostin and Gostin (2009) reason that ‘if the collective benefits are high and the individual
“What’s done cannot be undone,”(V,1,2188) are the words of a guilty, manipulative, and regretful character in Shakespeare's masterpiece Macbeth. That character is Lady Macbeth. The phrase “behind every great man is a great woman” is truly proven in this play. Lady Macbeth was the one who had Macbeth gain all the power she desired. She was the great woman who was behind the mighty king.
Everyone says cancun is great.I would love to go to cancun because there is ziplines, cool islands, and a huge snorkaling and scubadiving park.
Imagine two children; one who has been completely vaccinated, and the other has never been vaccinated. Both children fall ill from the same virus, but the child who had been vaccinated fully recovers, while the child who was not passes away due to complications. That child’s life could have been saved if the child received the proper vaccinations. Ever since the invention of the Smallpox vaccine more than two centuries ago, there has been an abundance of controversy over the morality, ethics, effectiveness, and safety of vaccinations and immunizations. It has recently been argued whether laws should be introduced that render some or all vaccines mandatory for all children. Parents, health care specialists, nurses, teachers, and children
John Stuart Mill, an English philosopher and a political economist, had an important part in forming liberal thought in the 19th century. Mill published his best-known work, _On Liberty,_ in 1859. This foundational book discusses the concept of liberty. It talks about the nature and the limits of the power performed by society over an individual. The book also deals with the freedom of people to engage in whatever they wish as long as it does not harm other persons.
Mankind has been fighting for Liberty and Freedom for as long as we can remember. Liberty and freedom has been a topic which has been debated for many decades. What does it mean to be free , and how far can we go to strive for freedom. These important questions have been answered and studied by two of the greatest English philosophers, John Locke and John Stuart Mill. Locke and Mill men will attempt to uncover the mysteries of Liberty and Freedom and unveil the importance of being free. This essay will look at John Locke’s principle works” Second Treatise of government” and John Stuart Mills. “ On Liberty and Other Essays”. This essay will attempt to compare and contrast Lockes ideology on Liberty and Freedom to that of Mill.
Between 1924 and 2013, vaccinations prevented 103 million cases of polio, measles, rubella, mumps, hepatitis A, diphtheria, and pertussis (Bailey). Vaccinating is “the process by which pathogenic cells are injected into a healthy person in an attempt to cause the body to develop antibodies to a particular virus or bacterium—successful creation of antibodies is referred to as immunity to the disease caused by the particular pathogen” (Introduction to Should Vaccinations be Mandatory). Popular conflicts regarding vaccination include the worry that this form of immunization isn’t natural, the idea that vaccination schedule for children in the U.S. takes away parents’ rights to make decisions for their children, and the concern that vaccinations aren’t safe for all children. Most doctors and scientists advocate for vaccinations in the name of herd immunity, protection against foreign diseases and prevention against pockets of disease outbreaks. Vaccinations should be mandatory for all children in the United States for who they are deemed safe and effective.
Recently an anti-vaccination movement has sparked a worldwide discussion about both the safety of vaccines and the responsibility of people to vaccinate. Recent outbreaks of preventable diseases have caused both fear and anger from people on both sides of the issue. These same outbreaks have also served to cause significant political tension between those against vaccines, who do not want their right to choose compromised, and many proponents of vaccines, who are calling for mandatory vaccinations.
Mill is extremely clear as to why the individual should be sovereign over his or her body and mindto counter the effects of a possible "tyranny of the majority." Mill states, "It (the majority) practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself" (63).
Mandatory vaccination is an extremely controversial topic because it violates constitutionally protected right to practice religion and personal beliefs in the absence of the true health emergency (First Amendment of the Constitution). The new law destroys the individual rights of parents to make voluntary decisions in the best interest of their children in the health care decisions and diminishes the role of parents in upbringing and educating their children (Skov).
John Stuart Mill discusses the conception of liberty in many ways. I’d like to focus of his ideas of the harm principle and a touch a little on his thoughts about the freedom of action. The harm principle and freedom on action are just two subtopics of Mill’s extensive thoughts about the conception on liberty. Not only do I plan to discuss and explain each of these parts on the conception of liberty, but I also plan to discuss my thoughts and feelings. I have a few disagreements with Mill on the harm principle; they will be stated and explained. My thoughts and feelings on Mill vary but I’d like to share my negative opinion towards the principle and hope to put it in a different perspective.
“Prevention is better than cure.” This common statement could not relate any better than it does with the controversy surrounding the morality, effectiveness, and safety of childhood immunizations. The major argument is whether or not laws should be established to declare vaccination mandatory for all children. “The US food and Drug administration (FDA) regulates all vaccines to ensure safety and effectiveness,” (ProCon.org, 2012) therefor there should not be any reason to risk the health of any child. Vaccinating our children not only ensures their safety but also that of their future to come.
JS Mill, a philosopher stated in his essay that “the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others”. Mill’s statement all but proved that mandatory vaccinations are justifiable. However, mandatory vaccination does not always work well. In other countries such as Sweden, Norway, Demark, the Netherlands and the UK mandatory vaccinations were not accepted. It has been proven that different approaches have worked better than forceful
Parents face many different decisions when raising a child; some decisions are trivial, and others can be controversial. Whether or not to vaccinate a child is one of the most controversial choices. So controversial, in fact, that there is a political conversation of making immunizations a requirement. Many people support the movement of making vaccinations mandatory. Proponents argue that vaccines save lives, vaccine-preventable diseases have not been eradicated, and vaccines protect herd immunity. Many people also disagree with the possibility of required vaccinations. Opponents argue that vaccines cause harm, immunity by vaccinations is inferior to natural immunity, and government policies should not dictate personal medical choices.
John Locke (1632-1704) and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) are two important thinkers of liberty in modern political thought. They have revolutionized the idea of human freedom at their time and have influenced many political thinkers afterwards. Although their important book on human freedom, John Locke’s The Second Treatise of Government (1689) and John Mill’s On Liberty (1859), are separated 170 years, some scholars thinks that they are belonging to the same conceptual tradition, English Liberalism. In this essay, I will elaborate John Locke and John Stuart Mill view on human freedom and try to find the difference between their concept of human freedom despite their similar liberal tradition background.
“Absolute liberty is the absence of restraint; responsibility is restraint; therefore, the ideally free individual is responsible to himself” - Henry Brooks Adams. There has been great debate, past and present with regards to what constitutes as an individuals liberty. It has been subject to constant ridicule and examination due to violations of civil rights. Freedom, liberty, and independence are all important human rights represented within John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty.