POL 004 --> Mill and Socrates

What is utilitarianism goal?

“The greatest happiness of the greatest number” aka Greatest Happiness Principle or GHP

• hapiness - pains

Who was Jeremy Bentham

British Utilitarian

• known for his panopticon (model prison) with its failure to receive funding from parliament

• had two disciples = James Mill and John Austin

• corpse is in college of london

What is Bentham’s Princple of Utiltiy?

The GHP is to be the standard ans motive for every action of every individual, whether in private life or in government service

ex: asking oneself if brushing teeth is exercising GHP

What is the value of a lot of pleasure or pains and how is it to be measured?

Pleasure and pains vary along seven dimensions:

(1) intensity

(2) duration

(3) certainty

(4) propinquity aka speed

(5) fecundity or fruitful (6) purity

(7) and extent

Who was Henry Sidwick?

• British defender of classical utilitarian doctorine

What is direct utilitarianism ?

Is the motive to act upon in GHP, people evaluate their actions based on consequences

What is indirect utilitarianism

Treats the GHP as the ultimate standard

ex: Sigwick

What is Direct Act Utilitarianism?

when one chooses acts in order to maximize happiness

Ex: does brushing your teeth maximize

Direct Rule Utilitarianism?

one chooses rules to maximize happiness ( ex: against theft, assault, murder) and choose acts that follow those rules

Ex: rule; murder is wrong so them we should make a rule for it 

—> however its just a rule of thumb to be broken when required to mzximize happiness.

What does Hedonistic mean?

involves the following set of claims:

1. happiness is just a matter of pleasure and pain

2. all pleasures and pains are homogenous ( across all activities and across people:

ex": “your pleasure just like my pleasure”

3. consequently, they can be treated as inputs in a felicific calculus

—> Quantitative hedonism

Note: Mill is a qualitative hedonist and Bentham and Sidgwick is just hedonists

What does Non Hedonistic mean?

rejects one or more of these claims.

• Mill rejects: fewer cultivated pleasures (ex: intellect ones) cannot be compensated by more bestial ones

• economis reject happiness as matter of pleasure and pains

What does Mill think all moral theories are?

Mill thinks all proper moral theories are teleological , meaning the good is defined independently from the right, and then the right is defined as what maximizes the good

• the good could be utility, perfection etc

All actions are for the sake of some end [telos], and rules of action, it seems natural to suppose, must take their whole character and color from the end to which they are subservient.” 

• define the good independently and the the moral is what promotes the good

• Whatever rules are required to maximize the good

What did Mill think about non-teological

Non-telogical theories ( moral-sense theory) believes its a theory that people critize that they haven’t taken the time to understand properly like bethnam

What is Mills Utilitarianism ?

• Mill follows the GHP as actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness and wrong ig they promote the opposite.

• By happiness is intended pleasure- pains and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain and the privation of pleasure

—> Suggest that Mill is a hedonistic where he defines happiness as a pleasure thus a positive feeling

—> He is a direct , where he believe is directive rule of human conduct

—> BUT OVERALL a qualitative hedonism

What is a qualitative hedonism ?

Have two features

1. absolute priority of higher over love pleasure

—> priority: pleasure of the intellect, of the feelings and imagination, and of moral sentiment those linked to higher faculties are ranked above those of mere sensations.

—> absolute: would not resign it for any quantity of other pleasure

• refers to needing to experience in order to feel higher priorities

2. “Competent judges” to rank these types

• the test of quality and the rule for measuring it against quantity, being the preference gelt by those who in their opportunities of experience, to which must be added their hanits of self consciousness and self observation are best furnished with the means of comparison.

• granted this ability but not powers

ex: doctor of medicine

→ for them to be judges they must have experienced all such pleasures many times and have reflected upon their experiences 

What is crypto-perfectionism? And why is Mill accused of this?

Question of crypto perfectionism comes into play when mill believes that pleasure and pain as it should be experienced in sentient beings, as it would be experience by them if they were competent judges but not all of them are so he is put into this strange position where …

• favorably judging an action that would increase pleasure for the competent judge actually increases pain for sentient being as they are

—> this would call for accuse Sidwich in saying he’s a perfectionist

How would Mill defend himself as a Hedonist against people’s accusations of him being a perfectionist?

Mill in his defense would argue that his support of the pleasure and pains are still the ultimate standard and thus hedonistic at its base but…

• Qualitative hedonism is just a transformation of hedonism once it arrived at a elevated concept of utility… grounded on the permanent interest of the man being as progressive being

—> meaning the prioritization of mental cultivation so that everyone may experience higher pleasures making it inclusive to all.

Is Mill an act or rule utilitarian?

Mill does not agree with Bentham’s act utilitarian since he believes that mankind has already learned by experience the tendency of actions which is why we consider whole categories of action such as murder, assault, and theft to be wrong

• Thus, he believes that utilitarianism endorses rule as guided for our behavior (rule of thumb)

Is Mill a Direct or Indirect Utilitarian

Although rule utilitarianism is a form of direct utilitarianism due to GHP being both an immediate standard and a motive for action

• However, Mill moves towards an indirect form of utilitarianism where GHP is the ultimate standard but not the sole or even the primary motive

• he also believe that utilitarianism should always act from hte motive of the promoting the interest of society

• thus, private people should and likely are motivated not bu gneral interest of society bit in their own or others

What does Mill say motivates us to act or judge with GHP? What binds us to it?

• sanctions such as punishment motivate us to act with it

• some santions include internal ones such as guilt or shame and external ones like fines and laws.

• we gain our internal sanction through our desire of unity with our community, connecting out utility with other sentient beings

• However, in order fo rus to feel these internal sanctions sympathy must be cultivated through education.

What is wrong with Mills “Proof” of GHP?

The issue starts with Mills claims to it being impossible to prove the GHP however he still tries…

1. Is/ought conflation: Mill states that the sole evidence is it possible to produce something that is desirable

   when people actually do desire it

—> the problem here is that mill is saying that because people desire something it is therefore good, but this bad 

—> you can’t soley derive a norm from a fact ( ex: God to law) why should I obey the moral law common response is because God made it ( factual claim) and from just that we ought to obey the law but this doesn’t make sense

1. fallacy of composition: saying that each person’s happiness is a good to that person and the general happiness , accordingly is a good to all persons

—> Sidgwick agrees in saying that everyone has an actual desire for general happiness

• The problem here is that its basically treating the GHP as a axiomatic where pleasure is intrinsically good and pain is intrinsically bad but there are times when pain can be good leading us to a higher pleasure. This would go against hedonism for it claims that pain and happiness are the only things that are intrinsically good and bad.

How does Mill believe that virtue ( truth, freedom, beauty, etc) should be treated?

Why is this an interesting take?

Mill believes it should be treated as a thing desirable in itself, as an intrinsic good because it is or can be part of hapinenes not just a means to it

—> Here Mill is thinking in an Aristotelian manner where pursuing the constituents of happiness for their own sake is the best way to attain happiness as a whole. For hapiness is a activity of the soul in accordance with virtue.

 —> Mill here is going against utilitarianism because happiness is the only desirable thing but now he is saying that there is more things 

→ He justifies this saying that this is still part of utilitarianism because these things are part of happiness and not just a means to it thus making it intrinsically good for its part of happiness 

How would Mill explain virtue, power, money , fame, music, health as a pleasure?

Mill would explain that virtue, power, and things like money can bring about pleasure but they aren’t pleasure themselves thus prompting a categorical mistake

—> This brings about a kind of fetishism where one mistakes the symblf for the thing desiring it, however Mill thinks this is useful psychological illusions

—> useful for treating true virtue as a means to pleasure as   if we connect freedom with pleasure it might confuse us to thinking freedom is pleasure but at times it can be helpful for it may increase the pursuit of it 

ex: money can lead to pleasure but itself isn’t pleasure thus its a categorical mistake  

What are the three evaluated categories for action/ agents (Mill)?

1. Justice: perfect duties require certain actions or omissions (ex: don’t murder) and correlative right ( like property of life) that are enforced by laws (ex: jail)

2. Morality (other than justice): Imperfect duties do not require certain actions or omissios but rather etting certain end ( ex: be nice or give to charity); it has no correlative rights and its enforced by opinion

3. expediency/ worthiness: the things we wish people would do or despise them for not doing but we they aren’t obligated to do thus its not a moral obligation for we don’t think they need punishment or blame

ex: An addict, we wish they would stop but we don’t blame them for it thus there is no punishment.

How is utility the ground of justice and limits it?

Mill says that to have a right then is to have something which society ought to defend me in possesion of it. If the objector goes on query, why should it ought? I can give him no other reason than general utility.... All persons are deemed to have a right to equality of treatment, except when some recognized social expediency requires the reverse” (189, 200; cf. OL...& Plato).

• Mill says justice is basically, a class of social utilities ( actions) that are conducive to the greatest happiness principle especially from a societal standpoint 

• But under certain circumstances this can be broken

• Rules are practical guide for our behavior but they can’t cover every situation that can come up 

What are Mill’s philosophical commitments?

Mill endorses three philosophical position

1. Utilitarianism (qualitative hedonism)

2. Perfectionism: which is a moral theory where certain states or activities such as knowledge, achievement, and artistic creation are good apart from any pleasure or happiness they bring what is morally right and what most prmotes there human excellences or perfections. its a teleological morality with an objective theory of the human good with a subjective theory of the human good (ex: hedonism)

3. Liberalism (egalitarian[Rawls] or classical [Locke]) : being grounded on the value of individual liberty/ personal freedom

   • with basic liberties such as freedom of speach, sonscience, press, etc

   • and institutional supports like the rule of law such as a written consitituion, judicial review, representative democracy, etc.

What are some tension that exists between the three commitments in their original form, before Mill has reshaped them?

Some tension that exists

1. Liberalism vs utilitarianism: banning atheist writings in a pious community and interracial/gay marriage in a bigoted one, thus averting pains of offense/wory.

2. liberalism vs perfectionism: contents restriction on speech promoting consumerism; prhibitions on unhealthy foods; mandatory Bach listening

3. utilitarianism vs perfectionism: dislodging people from positions of comfort ( ex: orthodox religious communities like AMish) to further personal growth

What does Mill say about the historical threats to individual liberty ad the two ways in which they were countered:

1. legal recognition of certain basic liberties (ex. bill of rights) and

2. popular constitutional checks (ex: an elected parliament)

• Mill warns. about the “tyranny of the majority, whether exercised by the state power or “prevailing opinion and feeling,” ex: social pressure

• To guard against such tyranny he suggest that the line between individual independence and social control be drawn to one very simple principle (Principal of Liberty) that would apply whether through legal penalties or moral coercion of public opinion

When is a government truly free? According to Mill?

Mill believes that mankind are warranted, individually or collectively in interfering with the liberty of action of any kind of their number, is self protection. The only pupose when a power can be rightfully exercised over any member of civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral is not a sufficient warrant… over himself over his own body and mind, the individual is soverign

The principal of liberty is limited in application to mentally competent adults in civilized nations

• its practical implications fall into three categories:

1. freedom of the mind: liberties of science, though feeling, freedom of speech

2. personal freedom: liberty of tastes and pursuits, free choice of life plan, freedom of action consistent with prevention of harm to others

3. freedom of association: combining and and initing with others consistent with prevention of harm to others

• Mill ends with saying that if a society lacks these three implications then that society is not free , and this applied to whatever may be its form of government; and none is entirely free in which they do not exist absolute and unqualified

How would Mill answer the question “how can basic rights be not only absolute and unqualified but also conditional upon social expediency

It must be utility in the largest sense, grounded on the permanent interests of man as a progressive being

How does (plural0 perfectionism apply to Mill hedonism?

Mills qualitative hedonism is an attempt to practice perfectionism within utilitarianism: the higher pleasures ( intellectual pleasures) are those related to the development and exercise of the “higher faculties”

• the objective theory of human good - the cultivation of intellectual and spiritual excellence is superior to the pursuit of sensual pleasures thus staying between a subjective theory of the human good (hedonism)

• Mill emphasizes the value of self-assertion, the questioning of conventional values and way of life, experimentation in both thought and living in a kind of intellectual and spiritual progress that all these bring.

• Mill is more broad in promoting the developments of strong, bold, morally and intellectual courageous personalities in all vocations such as art, religion, etc

How does Mill reconsile with the three commitments?

Mill…

1. practices perfectionism within utilitarianism: qualitative hedonism embodies the spirit of the former but remains (barely) consistent with the instrumental perfectionism

2. builds liberalism into his perfectionism: only freely-chooses self development values

3. has faith in human progress under liberalism: freedom and edication will yield development

What are the four grounds for freedom expressions

The four grounds for freedom of opinion and its expression are

1. “If any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may for aught we can certainly know be true. To deny this is to assume out own infallibility

—> This is the assumption of infallibility basically ssuming that you are not and cannot be wrong. The issue here is that you are not allowing yourself to be critiques and thus not allowing you to find the truth violating the truth value and violating self development since you aren’t discussing.

2. “though the silenced opinion ba an error, it may and very commonly does, contain a portion of the truth; and since the genral or prevailing opinion on any subject is rarely or never the whole truth, it is only by the collision of adverse opinions that the remainder of the truth has any chance of being supplied

—> this is the partial truth , the idea that someone could be saying something that is somewhat true but its not the whole truth. If you don’t allow for freedom of expression you won’t be able to allow that person to know if they are right or wrong.

Prevailing opinion: FALSE

-- - - - - - - - - — - - - - -

TRUE

3. “Even if the received opinion be not only true but the whole truth , unles it is suffered to be and actually is, vigorous and earnestly contested, it will bu most of those who conceive it, be held in the manner of a prejudice, with little comprehension or feeling of its rational grounds

   —> This. is the dead dogma

   • the dogma part is a belief that is just uphelf to be true like a strongly held belief

   • dead part is that the dogma has been left alone , lacking debate thus we don’t know if its true

   • moreover its true but you don’t know why since it isn’t being discussed

4. “ the meaning of the doctrine itself will be in danger of being lost, or enfeebled, and deprived of its vital effect on the character and conduct: the doma becoming a mere formal profession, inefficacious for good, but cumbering the ground and preventing the growth of any real and heartfelt conviction from reason or personal experience.”

   —> this is the vital effect where those claiming they believe something like the correct opinion lack motivation in their though since they don’t truly believe it.

—> grounds show us that we value truth which is why we discuss and it matters how we believe in something ( true opinion vs knowledge)

Why does Mill support freedom of opinion and speech?

Mill although partly supports the pursuit of truth, he also wants and encourages the development of human capacities for thought and action

Individuality and Perfection

• Mill contents that men should be free to actio upon their opinions to carry these out in their lives so ling they do no harm to anyone else .. he believes that everyone hsould have a different experiment of living

—> here Mill’s perfectionism is the organizing theeme even though Mill still promises. tomake utility the appeal to all ethical questions

What is the mapping boundary between individual liberty and social control?

Zone A:

There has to be an argument or how its harmful to others in the realm of A 

• A are actions that cause no harm or harm on oneself ex: wicked thoughts

• Here there is individual control

  • Whatever your doing is not Harmful to other so there is NO need Of intervention in any regards 

  • Here age of maturity reached And need of rationality

  • Ex: if someone is drunk thus not Rational intervention is ok but in a we assume that that person is of rational ; Ex: bridge analogy tells us though There is no intervention, its okay for Someone to let you know that you may Harm yourself walking the bridge  But if that individual is aware of That danger and continues on then There is no further intervention allowed

  
  

Realm of potential social control: 

• Potential of harm on others 

• There are types of harm that fall in A,B,C, and D 

Zone B: 

• B is harm to other ar less of a cost ex: fidgeting which bothers someone else

• Action outweigh cost 

• Extension of zone A 

• Small harm to other that is really insignificant so there is no need of interference, you just have to deal with it

• Ex: pink houses, might annoy someone but enlisting a law to prohibit that is costly in enforcement, ambiguity, etc so we will just simply allow the action 

Zone C: 

• Unlikeable Behavior like being nasty etc

• Harms are not so severe that we need law enforcement so more social sanctions 

• Social interference of society 

• There is harm done to others and society can interfere in some way 

• Social cost: harm to your reputations like being ridiculed or  taint your image 

• A harm here can be being rude to someone

Zone D:

• theft; assault where there is need for legal sanctions

• Interference by the law ( state itself) 

• Punishment can be jail time 

• Harm is much greater 

What is a bold heterodox stand that Mill takes?

Mill takes a controversial stand saying ther eis no parity between the feeling of a person for his own opinion, and the feeling of another who is offended at his holding it; no more than between the desire of a thief to take a purse, and the desire of the right owner to keep it

—> “no parity” suggests that the former is larger or more important than the latter being consistent with quantitative hedonism (Betham or Sidwick

ex: → he draws and analogy with a purse theft and purse owner where we disregard the feeling of the thief suggesting that Mill is saying that a feeling of offense be it religious, moral, or otherwise is properly disregarded and not to be counted as damage to the one offended allowing free develioment of individuality as the injury feared is great and the presumption that it will occur is shown by experience to be strong

• he’s ignoring religious offense, envy, or moral outrage
  (e.g., against polygamy), his overriding concern is to prevent social
  disapproval from stifling individual spontaneity and “experiments of
  living,” which are prerequisites for human development and progress.

What sort of Applications to public policy issues does Mill believe in?

1. competition: especially in labor and product markets and in educational testing and provisions

2. citizen participation in local government

—> the point of these applications is to minimize the welfarist

What is the justifiable Paternalism?

Although the principle of liberty is anti paternalism (restircting of freedom), Mill makes room for paternalism towards adults

• Mill notes that forcibly stopping a man from crossing an if theres no time to warn him is not a violation of the principle of liberty for liberty consists in doing what one desires

• He notes that here is no justification for preventing a man from incurring risks “unless he is a child, or delirious, or in some state of excitement or absorption in compatible with the full use of the reflecting faculty

• The application of the principle of liberty is conditional only to people who are

  1. informed

  2. mature

  3. sober and at least potentially fully reflective

What does mill say about alcohol being hard to obtain

• He condemns policies making alcohol “impossible or [even] difficult to obtain

• Drunkenness punishable only if an individual has a previous conviction either of violence or of failure to discharge legal duties ( e.g. child support ) due to drink ( DUI ) 

• He support regulation to prevent alcohol providers from promoting intemperance which is in their interest legal liability for bartenders, controls on advertising 

• the state may not “indirectly discourage” drinking for paternalist reasons ( ex sin taxes)  but may do so in order to raise revenue efficiently (e.g inverse-elasticity rule [ beer or reduce negative externalities) 

What is Mills view on regulating procreation?

• supports laws that forbid marriage if one cannot show means of supporting a family

• supports this in order to prevent the harm to both the child and third parties like taxpayers

• suggest to be effected in parental screening or licensing

What does Mill think makes for a good government?

• a good government promotes aggregate interests and the well being of the governed

• talks about twofold division

  1. consists partly of the degree in which they promote the general mental advancement of the community, including under that phrase advancement in intellect, in virtue an in practical activity and efficiency [ higher faculties → quality hedonism ] 

  2. Partly of the degree of perfection with which they organize the moral, intellectual, and active worth already existing, so as to operate with the greatest effect on public affairs 

• government is to be judged, “ by what makes if the citizens, and what it makes with the citizen and what it does with them” ( tools)” 

• Mill gives strong priority to first ( even who it detracts from second eg local democracy: “ most important excellence”; “citizens “good qualities supply the moving force which works the [state] machinery ( end of OL)

Whats Mills view on government? —> Democracy

• Mill argues that popular control of government: 

1. Protects individual and minority rights 

2. Enlists all personal energies in promoting general prosperity and food governance 

3. Enhances national character

What are Mills view on enhancing character?

1. Mill says of the idealized good despot that he is one man of superhuman mental activity managing the entire affairs of a mentally passive people. Their passivity is implied in the very idea of absolute power. it is negative how absence of poopular ocntrol can degrade character

2. popular control can also enhance character when popular control consist with the active character type which stuggles against evil ; ultimately leading to intellectual practical moral excellence

   • Formal political equality serves as a goad to political effort: “ the maximum of the invigorating effect of freedom upon the character is only obtained when the person acted on either is, or is looking forward to coming, a citizen as fully privileged as any other”

   • Political activity enlarges the sphere of personal concerns by providing a political education, thereby extending knowledge and introducing variety in ideas: it makes citizens “very different beings, in range of idea and development of faculties, from those who have done nothing in their lives but drive a will, or sell goods over a counter ( ditto associational market socialism) 

   • Political activity improves us morally by teaching concerns for the public interest and the obligations of shared citizenship: through it a man comes to “weigh interest not his own”and be concerned with the “general good”, just as a utilitarian should be 

   • One small problem with Mill's argument is that the virtues he ascribes to popular government, esp. Its educate function, are most closely linked to direct, not representative, democracy, but that why he back extensive local democracy 

   
   

What is Mills defense of enlightened despotism over barbarians?

• Mill offers his controversial defense of enlightened despotism over “barbarians” i.e backwards states of society in which the [human] race may be considered in its nonage

→ “barbarians” somewhat of an authoritarian regime 

→ talking about human race 

• Such despotism over barbarians, whether it is carried out by domestic or foreign despot ( e.g. colonial powers), is permissible  only three conditions hold, however… 

1. The end must be their improvement ( autonomy)

• Own ends on its end 

• Self governance is the goal

2. The means justified by actual affecting that end and 

3. They must not be improvable by other, less coercive means (eg persuasion;n least restrictive means possible) 

What is Mills detailed developmental trajectory for barbaian society?

• tep-by-step process of institutional reform that induces a parallel process of character eform, culminating in political and intellectual self government 

• The four stages of institution →  character reform are: 

1. slavery / serfdom → obedience & patient industry, 

2. Pleasant proprietorship → intelligence, prudence  & self control 

3. Political centralization → willingness to resist ( local tyranny) 

4. Representative institution/government → spirit of nationality

 

• By the end of this process, an enlightened despot has created not only a set of democratic institutions but also a citizenry that is mature and virtuous enough to administer them.

•  Problems: capacity (expertise & tenure) and motivation.

What are the defects of representative democracy ?

• Mill identifies two major defects of this kind of state: 

1.  General ignorance and incapacity, or , to speak more moderately, insufficient mental qualifications, in the controlling body: If you want to bring talent into government, the only genuine choices are between bureaucratic aristocracy and representative democracy: the goal should be to combine the virtues of each 

2. “ the danger of being under the confluence of interests not identical with the general welfare of community”: a problem of insistent interest," the tyranny of the majority,” and class legislation more broadly. Solution?

what does Mill mean when he says that governments have been aristocracies of public functionaries

• He has in mind here the ancient Roman republic as well as the more modern Venetian one where: 

1. The ruling bodies were small and skilled: they “accumulated experience; acquired well-tried and well considered traditional maxims; made provision for appropriate practical knowledge in those who have the actual conduct of affairs.”

2. Each member made the public business his chief occupation 

3. “Dignity and estimation were the rewards of service, honor 

4. Its goal were state wealth and glory rather than the general happiness of the population

What is the problem ans solution with talent of the government?

• Problem: “ a disease which afflicts bureaucratic governments, and which they usually die of, is routine a popular government to enable the conceptions of a man of original genius among them.

Solutione?: combine the virtues  of bureaucracy and democracy, yielding 

“ the great advantage of the conduct of affair by skilled persons, bred to it as an intellectual profession, along with that of a general control vested in, and seriously exercised by bodies representative of the entire people… selecting, watching and controlling the governors 

• Mill appears to endorsing here a three-tied system of government: 

1.  A highly skilled administrations/ bureaucracy, selected and controlled by 

2. A supervisory legislation, which os selected and controlled in turn by 

3. A democratic citizenry, including the full adult population, ( ideally

What is the dangers of sinister interest?

• These are interest conflicting with the general good of the community ( bethamns term) 

• In an inclusive representative democracy, mill thinks the most dangerous sinister interest is that of the numerical majority may be under the dominion of sectional or class interest. The hazard is in their self-interested exercise of legislative power:

“One of the greatest dangers...of democracy...lies in the sinister interest of the holders of power: it is the danger of class legislation; of government intended for...the immediate benefit of the dominant class, to the lasting detriment of the whole. And one of the most important questions demanding consideration, in determining the best constitution of a representative government, is how to provide efficacious securities against this evil.” (299)

• Mill discusses balancing key factions

What is the Universal by graduated suffurage?

1. Literacy requirement: “universal teaching must precede universal enfranchisement,” but universa, itching is a moral necessity 

2. Taxpayer requirements “ Those who pay no texes have every motive to be lavish” so al must pau a small head tax to become an elector 

3. Welfare disqualification: “he who cannot by his labor suffice for his own money of other through political participation

• Graduates sufferage ( plural voting) the opinion the judgment of the higher moral or intellectual being is worth more that of the inferior: and if the institutions of the country virtually assert that they are of the same value, they assert a thing which is not. One of the two, as the wiser or better man, has a claim to superior weight....”

•  1st Best Version: by standardized national exam of (civic) knowledge (336).

•  2nd Best Version: by considering occupation and educational attainment as a

proxy for intellectual capacity, but with a voluntary exam alternative (336-8). (N.B.: this was the way the British system worked until 1949—both business owners and university graduates had two votes apiece.)

What are Mills view on women suffurage?

As usual, Mill’s well ahead of the curve, historically speaking

• “ taken no account of difference of sex. I consider it to be as entirely irrelevant to political rights as difference in height or in the color of the hair.”

• He notes the sheer absurdity of excluding women from the vote when the contemporary monarch (Victoria) and, on his estimation, the greatest English monarch (Elizabeth I) were both women, and hopes that “before the lapse of another generation, the accident of sex, no more than the accident of skin, will be deemed a sufficient justification for depriving its possessor of the equal protection and just privileges of a citizen.”