Are you interested in getting a customized paper? Related Essay on liberty Voting Essays Just Walk on By Essays Electoral College Essays Maus Essays Anthem Essays. Sections Hide. It is common knowledge that concentration of power in one hand or in one administration may infringe the individual liberty. Both liberty and law must coexist. Another criticism Mill deals with is that because we no longer we put people to death for controversial ideas, then the truth can never truly be extinguished today with the internet we can find almost anything that we want about anything, essay on liberty.
Related Essays
Essay 1. Negatively speaking, liberty means absence of all restraints, while positively speaking, it means freedom to do whatever one wants. Thus in the second sense liberty is of the nature of licence, pure and simple. This type of liberty is not possible in a modern state, where everyone has to adjust himself to the fair play of freedom of all. In the first place, an individual in order to express his personality in thought, word and action wants freedom, i. In the second place liberty carries, with itself a kind of restraint on his own freedom for the sake of adjustment of similar freedom of others in the state.
Thus there are provisions for punishment in the criminal code for those who exceed the limits put on their freedom. Essay 2, essay on liberty. Liberty can be divided into five kinds — natural liberty, civil liberty, political liberty, economic liberty and national liberty. In modern states there cannot be any natural liberty. This type of liberty might have existed in the pre-state stage of human civilisation, essay on liberty. According to Jean Jacques Rousseau, the people enjoyed essay on liberty liberty in the state of nature and men lost such liberty with the creation of the state. Natural liberty is an unlimited and unrestricted freedom. This concept of liberty is imaginary and cannot exist in a civilised society. This type of liberty is actually essay on liberty. Only the strong can enjoy the right in a jungle life, essay on liberty.
The weak will be exploited. Might can be right in a jungle, not in a civil community. So we reject the natural liberty as a bogus one. Civil liberty implies freedom enjoyed by the people in a civil society. This type of liberty emanates from the civil rights which include right to life, liberty and property. These are the basic civil amenities, without which a man, whether he is a citizen or an alien, cannot lead a civil life. It is also the bounden duty of the state to essay on liberty these opportunities to the individuals in the state. About civil liberty, R. Political liberty stands for the political rights to have a share in the government. Such political liberty is possible only in a democracy.
The democratic functions of the state will be impossible if the state does not provide its citizens with political liberty. Political liberty is identical with the constitutional liberty which means democratic rule, essay on liberty. In order to make political liberty real, the citizens will have four political rights, which are discussed below:. The citizens will have the right to vote on attaining majority to elect the legislature. In India the voting age is from 18 years. Almost all the democratic countries have granted this right to the citizens, since it is the most basic element in a democracy.
Not only the right to vote but also the right to stand as a candidate is another important political right in a democracy. The legislatures and all representative bodies must not be permanent. These institutions should essay on liberty elected after some fixed time. In India the Lok Sabha which is the lower house of the parliament is elected after every five years. The citizens are to be given the right to elect a strong opposition to criticise the party in power, essay on liberty. The other method of criticism is freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom to assemble peacefully for demonstration against the government. Civil and political liberty will be meaningless without economic liberty, essay on liberty.
The state should see that there is no imbalance in the economic life of the people because of concentration of wealth in the hands of the few. It does not mean attainment of economic equality but removal of side economic disparity. It implies the right to work and right to a decent living. It also includes other benefits like sickness insurance, old age pension, unemployment insurance, etc. It is linked with the theory of one nationality, one state. It implies that every nation must have a right of self-determination. It may essay on liberty freedom from the foreign rule or creation of a full-fledged sovereign state by each nation.
By exercising this liberty India became independent from the control of the British imperial power. By dint of similar right Bangladesh became an independent essay on liberty country by severing herself from Pakistan. Essay 3. Behind the law there is the sovereign authority of state. If law is violated, the violator is punished. There are two opposite views on the relation between liberty and law. According to the individualists, essay on liberty, law or authority is detrimental to the individual personality of man. John Stuart Mill and William Godwin are the chief exponents of the individualist theory. Mill had no hesitation that laws of the state are clear infringement of the liberty of the individuals.
So long as the liberty of an individual does not essay on liberty the liberty of other individuals there should be no authority to curtail the liberty of the former. The extreme view is held by the anarchists who suggested that the state with all its legal system must be abolished. A contrary view is held by the idealists who want that the state should be all-powerful and the individuals must seek salvation through the state. The individuals essay on liberty be concerned with their duties to the state and must surrender all their liberties. It is the concern of the state to see to the well-being of the individuals. The state being an embodiment of morality stands on a higher footing than the individuals. Essay on liberty individuals will get the due benefits within the state, not outside it.
All individuals must subordinate themselves to the ethical and social consciousness of the state. The two views mentioned above are exaggeration of facts. Individual liberty cannot be a wild buffalo. The state is not to rope the freedom of individuals either. We must seek a via media. Both liberty and law must coexist, essay on liberty. Law does not infringe the individual liberty, essay on liberty. The idealist view that liberty lies in obedience to law is also not correct. The state exists for the all-round development of the society.
If law is abolished there will be anarchy. In anarchy the liberty of the individual will not thrive, essay on liberty. Law endures a social order and creates conditions for liberty. Liberty is the end of law. If law fails to protect individual liberty that law or authority is not good. Essay 4. Safeguards of Liberty in a Modern State: Liberty is the finest fruit of human civilisation. So it is to be preserved. There are various instruments by which the individual liberty can be safeguarded. Democracy as a form of government is most conducive to the growth of liberty. This is considered the best form of government, because its main concern is to upkeep the freedom of the people.
Without the opportunity of freedom there cannot be any liberty. It is, therefore, seen that the liberty of an individual is best safeguarded in a democratic country like England and the USA. Without rights there cannot be liberty. Some of the rights are considered basic and called the fundamental rights. In constitutions of some democratic countries these fundamental rights are incorporated and guaranteed. It means that no authority can take away these rights. Thus the constitutions of the USA, France and India have enumerated these rights and guaranteed their protection.
If these rights are inroaded by any authority, the individual can approach the courts of law. These fundamental rights are, therefore, some protective umbrellas over the individual liberty. If the legislative, executive and judicial powers are combined in one person or one organisation there is scope for poaching on the individual liberty. So Charles-Louis Montesquieu and Sir William Blackstone pleaded for separation of powers, i. While there should be as much separation of power as possible it is not always practicable to have rigid separation of powers. Judiciary is one of the three organs of the government, essay on liberty.
We have already noticed the good of separation of three organs of government. But the utmost importance is attached to the independence of the judiciary; it means that the executive or the legislature must not control or curb the power of the judges, essay on liberty. If the judges are independent, much of the abuses of the individual liberty may be avoided. The independent as against committed judges help the protection of individual liberty.
sex education in schools essay
In my opinion, the line that Mill draws is consistent with his views that the law should only intervene in situations where it is to protect people from harm. Limiting speech tends to encourage the same reactionary movements it tries to prevent. Another criticism Mill deals with is that because we no longer we put people to death for controversial ideas, then the truth can never truly be extinguished today with the internet we can find almost anything that we want about anything. This may be a reason to suggest that to suppress free speech is futile therefore why even attempt in the first place.
I believe that we have seen this rise of this reactionary populism where for a long time those with liberal views encouraged an environment of ironic intolerance for any ideas outside of their own beliefs, which far from changing minds simply muffled voices for public shaming causing a dogmatic intellectual environment. I believe what we are seeing now with the rise in right-wing populism is that a lot of the ironic intolerance from certain people on the left has encouraged people on different views to no longer speak openly about them due to this culture of intellectual intolerance. So by censoring minority opinions the majority is making an environment where only certain ideas are valid, which is not fair. This is due to a false belief that goes unchallenged is just as likely to become a dead dogma as a true belief and therefore the only way to keep the truth alive is to subject it to challenge.
All it can take is for one new idea or one new piece of evidence to completely change what was previously perceived to be true. The main criticism to this argument is that if someone is taught the grounds of a belief similar how they are taught basic math before learning complex equations then they are not simply reciting a dogma, but have an understanding why they believe what they believe. We should understand opposing views as well as our own views, so we can prove our opinions to be true with absolute certainty. This makes it more apparent that the majority should not silence any minority opinions if they are not willing to deal with arguments challenging their own beliefs.
John Stuart noticed this tendency in Christianity where certain beliefs have been protected from criticism for so long that most Christians do not know the meaning behind their beliefs. Another example would be if we say we are against child labour then we must work hard to stop child labour in every aspect, otherwise people may just ignore the rational importance behind the idea of stopping child labour. Mill thought to allow beliefs to be challenged rather than protected forced people to search for the meaning behind their own beliefs. If the majority is not well educated in what they believe they should not silence any unpopular views since they do not understand what they believe in.
The fourth argument Mill delivers is that very often it is not as simple as one view being correct and an opposing view being incorrect, but rather the truth lies somewhere in between. Mill believed that many views held as popular truth contained only partial truth. Mill stated that when we hear an opinion we assume its either right or wrong. This explains why some people due to their assumed infallibility silence those who have opinions that differ from theirs. We can only understand the full truth when we allow different opinions to pave the way for the full truth to emerge. A good example of this would fall into politics wherein a healthy political state we have two parties with opposing views.
This relates to our own political system in Canada where we have the liberal party who believe in progression and change, and on the other side we have the conservatives who strive for order and stability. In conclusion, John Stuart Mill recognized that society tends to encourage conformity whether it is through laws the government enforces or if it is through societal pressure. Freedom of speech is not just about whether the government censors you, it is a philosophical principle. Remember: This is just a sample from a fellow student. It is interesting to think how as time passes, the attitudes and behavior of people change. They would react differently to the same situation in a different timeline even though if it were the same situation.
China Liberty. Feeling stressed about your essay? Starting from 3 hours delivery. Top 10 Similar Topics Corruption Political Corruption Interest Groups State Democratic Party Republican Party Reform Political Party Public Service Income Tax. Got it. Haven't found the right essay? In the first place, an individual in order to express his personality in thought, word and action wants freedom, i. In the second place liberty carries, with itself a kind of restraint on his own freedom for the sake of adjustment of similar freedom of others in the state.
Thus there are provisions for punishment in the criminal code for those who exceed the limits put on their freedom. Essay 2. Liberty can be divided into five kinds — natural liberty, civil liberty, political liberty, economic liberty and national liberty. In modern states there cannot be any natural liberty. This type of liberty might have existed in the pre-state stage of human civilisation. According to Jean Jacques Rousseau, the people enjoyed natural liberty in the state of nature and men lost such liberty with the creation of the state. Natural liberty is an unlimited and unrestricted freedom. This concept of liberty is imaginary and cannot exist in a civilised society.
This type of liberty is actually license. Only the strong can enjoy the right in a jungle life. The weak will be exploited. Might can be right in a jungle, not in a civil community. So we reject the natural liberty as a bogus one. Civil liberty implies freedom enjoyed by the people in a civil society. This type of liberty emanates from the civil rights which include right to life, liberty and property. These are the basic civil amenities, without which a man, whether he is a citizen or an alien, cannot lead a civil life. It is also the bounden duty of the state to provide these opportunities to the individuals in the state. About civil liberty, R. Political liberty stands for the political rights to have a share in the government. Such political liberty is possible only in a democracy.
The democratic functions of the state will be impossible if the state does not provide its citizens with political liberty. Political liberty is identical with the constitutional liberty which means democratic rule. In order to make political liberty real, the citizens will have four political rights, which are discussed below:. The citizens will have the right to vote on attaining majority to elect the legislature. In India the voting age is from 18 years. Almost all the democratic countries have granted this right to the citizens, since it is the most basic element in a democracy.
Not only the right to vote but also the right to stand as a candidate is another important political right in a democracy. The legislatures and all representative bodies must not be permanent. These institutions should be elected after some fixed time. In India the Lok Sabha which is the lower house of the parliament is elected after every five years. The citizens are to be given the right to elect a strong opposition to criticise the party in power. The other method of criticism is freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom to assemble peacefully for demonstration against the government.
Civil and political liberty will be meaningless without economic liberty. The state should see that there is no imbalance in the economic life of the people because of concentration of wealth in the hands of the few. It does not mean attainment of economic equality but removal of side economic disparity. It implies the right to work and right to a decent living. It also includes other benefits like sickness insurance, old age pension, unemployment insurance, etc. It is linked with the theory of one nationality, one state. It implies that every nation must have a right of self-determination. It may mean freedom from the foreign rule or creation of a full-fledged sovereign state by each nation. By exercising this liberty India became independent from the control of the British imperial power.
By dint of similar right Bangladesh became an independent sovereign country by severing herself from Pakistan. Essay 3. Behind the law there is the sovereign authority of state. If law is violated, the violator is punished. There are two opposite views on the relation between liberty and law. According to the individualists, law or authority is detrimental to the individual personality of man. John Stuart Mill and William Godwin are the chief exponents of the individualist theory. Mill had no hesitation that laws of the state are clear infringement of the liberty of the individuals.
So long as the liberty of an individual does not hamper the liberty of other individuals there should be no authority to curtail the liberty of the former. The extreme view is held by the anarchists who suggested that the state with all its legal system must be abolished.
No comments:
Post a Comment