What do you think?
The Basic Writings: On Liberty/The Subjection of Women/Utilitarianism
The writings of John Stuart Mill have become the cornerstone of political liberalism. Collected for the first time in this volume are Mill's three seminal and most widely read works: "On Liberty, The Subjection of Women, and Utilitarianism," A brilliant defense of individual rights versus the power of the state, "On Liberty" is essential reading for anyone interested in political thought and theory. As Bertrand Russell reflected, "On Liberty remains a classic . . . the present world would be better than it is, if Mill's] principles were more respected." This Modern Library Paperback Classics edition includes newly commissioned endnotes and commentary by Dale E. Miller, and an index.
400 pages, Paperback
First published May 14, 2002
About the author
John Stuart Mill
2,035 books2,052 followersJohn Stuart Mill, English philosopher, political economist, civil servant and Member of Parliament, was an influential liberal thinker of the 19th century. He was an exponent of utilitarianism, an ethical theory developed by Jeremy Bentham, although his conception of it was very different from Bentham's.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
January 18, 2017
Update 2020-07-08:
One of the few books everybody should know.
• "In the case of any person whose judgment is really deserving of confidence, how has it become so? Because he has kept his mind open to criticism of his opinions and conduct. Because it has been his practice to listen to all that could be said against him; to profit by as much of it as was just, and expound to himself, and upon occasion to others, the fallacy of what was fallacious. Because he has felt that the only way in which a human being can make some approach to knowing the whole of a subject, is by hearing what can be said about it by persons of every variety of opinion, and studying all modes in which it can be looked at by every character of mind. No wise man ever acquired his wisdom in any mode but this; nor is it in the nature of human intellect to become wise in any other manner." p.22
• "First, if any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility."
• Secondly, though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth.."
"No one can be a great thinker who does not recognize, that as a thinker it is his first duty to follow his intellect to whatever conclusions it may lead."
John Stuart Mill’s writings is surely a goldmine of the clearest philosophical thought expressed in the best English, humbleness and brilliant arguments you can find in philosophy as a whole. The thinking is so modern and still balanced with his encyclopedic knowledge of the classics. He urges us to listen to others and consider a variety of opinions and to be able to argue the other side. His “on liberty” was concidered a classic when published and hade huge influence on how we view freedom for the individual in society. His subject is the nature and limits of the power that can be legitimately excercised by society over the individual. This is timeless wisdom indeed!
One of the few books everybody should know.
• "In the case of any person whose judgment is really deserving of confidence, how has it become so? Because he has kept his mind open to criticism of his opinions and conduct. Because it has been his practice to listen to all that could be said against him; to profit by as much of it as was just, and expound to himself, and upon occasion to others, the fallacy of what was fallacious. Because he has felt that the only way in which a human being can make some approach to knowing the whole of a subject, is by hearing what can be said about it by persons of every variety of opinion, and studying all modes in which it can be looked at by every character of mind. No wise man ever acquired his wisdom in any mode but this; nor is it in the nature of human intellect to become wise in any other manner." p.22
• "First, if any opinion is compelled to silence, that opinion may, for aught we can certainly know, be true. To deny this is to assume our own infallibility."
• Secondly, though the silenced opinion be an error, it may, and very commonly does, contain a portion of truth.."
"No one can be a great thinker who does not recognize, that as a thinker it is his first duty to follow his intellect to whatever conclusions it may lead."
John Stuart Mill’s writings is surely a goldmine of the clearest philosophical thought expressed in the best English, humbleness and brilliant arguments you can find in philosophy as a whole. The thinking is so modern and still balanced with his encyclopedic knowledge of the classics. He urges us to listen to others and consider a variety of opinions and to be able to argue the other side. His “on liberty” was concidered a classic when published and hade huge influence on how we view freedom for the individual in society. His subject is the nature and limits of the power that can be legitimately excercised by society over the individual. This is timeless wisdom indeed!
May 3, 2020
Sono "milliana" da un bel po', senza saperlo. Ho applicato la teoria dell'utilitarismo a fondo negli ultimi anni, senza immaginare neanche che esistesse. Ho letto le pagine di Mill con grande rispetto: non solo per la sua grande intelligenza ma anche e soprattutto per la grande umanità che pervade le sue pagine - confermata poi col suo ultimo articolo, sull'asservimento delle donne, in cui lui si spende con grande sentire sulla questione femminile, sulla parità dei sessi partendo almeno dall'uguaglianza dei diritti all'interno del matrimonio (ma non solo: Mill si batté a lungo affinché le donne potessero votare. Riuscì persino ad ottenere un posto in parlamento. Quando in seguito non riuscì più ad ottenerlo, non smise comunque mai di battersi per loro). L'utilitarismo essenzialmente si occupa della felicità e della sua ricerca e di quanto sia importante che l'Uomo la perseguiti perché solo una società composta da membri felici sarà una società "felice". Io mi esprimo in maniera estremamente grossolana, ma Mill (appassionato anche e soprattutto del ragionamento argomentativo perché è il più giusto, il più corretto e soprattutto quello in cui l'abilità del pensiero dell'Uomo può raggiungere massimo godimento e sviluppo) lo spiega con grande finezza - ed, insisto, umanità. Mi è piaciuto moltissimo non solo leggerlo ma che questo libro mi abbia accompagnato durante la Quarantena.
September 7, 2026
Le regole morali che proibiscono agli uomini di nuocersi reciprocamente (fra cui non dovremmo mai dimenticare di includere l’indebita ingerenza nella libertà altrui) hanno per il nostro benessere un interesse più vitale di qualsiasi altra massima che, per quanto importante, si limiti a indicare il modo migliore di amministrare un certo settore delle faccende umane. Le regole morali hanno anche la peculiarità di essere l’elemento che contribuisve più di ogni altro a formare l’insieme dei sentimenti sociali dell’umanità. Solo osservando quelle regole si riesce a preservare la pace fra gli esseri umani; se l’obbedienza a esse non fosse la regola e la disobbedienza l’eccezione, ognuno vedrebbe in ogni suo simile un possibile nemico, contro cui stare continuamente in guardia. E, cosa non meno importante riguardo a questi precetti, gli uomini hanno le ragioni più forti e più dirette di volerseli scolpire bene in mente l’un l’altro. Se la gente si limitasse a darsi reciprocamente saggi consigli o esortazioni, potrebbe anche non ottenere nulla, o pensare di non ottenere nulla; il nostro interesse a inculcare nei nostri simili il dovere di una beneficenza fattiva è incontestabile, ma è di grado molto inferiore, giacché può sempre darsi che una persona non abbia bisogno di benefici altrui: ma sempre avrà bisogno che gli altri non le facciano del male. Così, le regole morali che proteggono ogni individuo dal male che gli altri potrebbero fargli, o direttamente oppure intralciando la sua libertà di perseguire il proprio bene, sono per un verso quelle regole che l’uomo ha più a cuore, e allo stesso tempo quelle che egli ha il massimo interesse a diffondere e a imporre con la parola e con l’azione. È dal modo in cui una persona osserva queste regole che si accerta e si decide la sua attitudine a far parte della comunità degli esseri umani, perché è da lì che dipende se si tratti o no di una persona nociva per coloro con cui viene a contatto. Orbene, sono soprattutto questele regole morali a formare le obbligazioni della giustizia.
October 7, 2024
THE UTILITARIAN PHILOSOPHER'S ONCE-OVERLOOKED PATHBREAKING ESSAY
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) was a British philosopher (known as a Utilitarian), political economist and member of Parliament.
It should be noted that Mill noted in his Autobiography that his wife Harriet Taylor Mill had been "the honour and chief blessing of my existence, as well as the source of a great part of all that I have attempted to do." Certainly, the present book is one of the books that Harriet Taylor [whose own works are available in 'The Complete Works of Harriet Taylor Mill'] had a strong influence on.
He begins the first chapter with the statement, "The object of this Essay is to explain as clearly as I am able, the grounds of an opinion which I have held from the very earliest period when I had formed any opinions at all on social or political matters, and which... has been growing constantly stronger by the progress of reflection and the experience of life. That the principle which regulates the existing social relations between the two sexes---the legal subordination of one sex to another---is wrong in itself, and now one of the chief hindrances to human improvement; and that it ought to be replaced by a principle of perfect equality, admitting no power or privilege on the one side, nor disability on the other." (Pg. 15)
He observes, "When we put together three things---first, the natural attraction between opposite sexes; secondly, the wife's entire dependence on the husband, ever privilege or pleasure she has being either his gift, or depending entirely on his will; and lastly, that the principal object of human pursuit, consideration, and all objects of social ambition, can in general be sought or obtained by her only through him, it would be a miracle if the object of being attractive to men had not become the polar star of feminine education and formation of character. And this great means of influence over the minds of women having been acquired, an instinct of selfishness made men avail themselves of it to the utmost as a means of holding women in subjection, by representing to them meekness, submissiveness, and resignation of all individual will into the hands of a man, as an essential part of sexual attractiveness." (Pg. 31)
He argues, "It will not do... to assert in general terms, that the experience of mankind has pronounced in favour of the existing system. Experience cannot possibly have decided between two courses, so long as there has only been the experience of one... I deny that anyone knows, or can know, the nature of the two sexes, as long as they have only been seen in their present relation to one another.
"If men had ever been found in society without women, or women without men, or if there had been a society of men and women in which the women were not under the control of the men, something might have been positively known about the mental and moral differences which may be inherent in the nature of each. What is now called the nature of women is an eminently artificial thing---the result of forced repression in some directions, unnatural stimulation in others... no other class of dependents have had their character so entirely distorted form its natural proportions by their relations with their masters." (Pg. 37-38)
He points out, "What women by nature cannot do, it is quite superfluous to forbid them from doing. What they can do, but not so well as the men who are their competitors, competition suffices to exclude them from; since nobody asks for protective duties or bounties in favour of women; it is only asked that the present bounties and protective duties in favour of men should be recalled.
"If women have a greater natural inclination for some things than for others, there is no need of laws or social inculcation to make the majority of them do the former in preference to the latter. Whatever women's services are most wanted for, the free play of competition will hold out the strongest inducements to them to undertake... they are most wanted for the things for which they are the most fit; by the apportionment of which to them, the collective faculties of the two sexes can be applied on the whole with the greatest sum of valuable result." (Pg. 44)
Of "Those who attempt to force women into marriage by closing all other doors against them," he says, "If they mean what they say, their opinion must evidently be, that men do not render the married condition so desirable to women, as to induce them to accept it for its own recommendations." (Pg. 45)
He suggests, "the generality of the male sex cannot yet tolerate the idea of living with an equal. Were it not for that, I think that almost everyone... would admit the injustice of excluding half the human race from the greater number of lucrative occupations, and from almost all high social functions; ordaining from their birth that they are not, and cannot by any possibility become, fit for employments which are legally open to the stupidest and basest of the other sex, or else that however fit they may be, those employments shall be interdicted to them, in order to be preserved for the exclusive benefit of males." (Pg. 69)
He notes in the closing chapter, "Think what it is to a boy, to grow up to manhood in the belief that without any merit or exertion on his own, though he may be the most frivolous and empty or the most ignorant and stolid of mankind, by the mere fact of being born a male he is by right the superior of all and every one of an entire half of the human race: including probably some whose real superiority to himself he has daily or hourly occasion to feel; but even if in his whole conduct he habitually follows a woman's guidance, still, if he is a fool, he thinks that of course she is not, and cannot be, equal in judgment to himself; and if he is not a fool, he does worse---he sees that she is superior to him, and believes that, notwithstanding her superiority, he is entitled to command and she is bound to obey. What must be the effect on his character, of this lesson?" (Pg. 103-104)
Until the Women's Movement in the 1960s, this book [as Susan Brownmiller points out in her Introduction to the book] was commonly regarded as one of Mill's "minor" works. Fortunately, we can now see this as a historically pathbreaking work, that deserves serious study by anyone even remotely interested in women's rights.
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) was a British philosopher (known as a Utilitarian), political economist and member of Parliament.
It should be noted that Mill noted in his Autobiography that his wife Harriet Taylor Mill had been "the honour and chief blessing of my existence, as well as the source of a great part of all that I have attempted to do." Certainly, the present book is one of the books that Harriet Taylor [whose own works are available in 'The Complete Works of Harriet Taylor Mill'] had a strong influence on.
He begins the first chapter with the statement, "The object of this Essay is to explain as clearly as I am able, the grounds of an opinion which I have held from the very earliest period when I had formed any opinions at all on social or political matters, and which... has been growing constantly stronger by the progress of reflection and the experience of life. That the principle which regulates the existing social relations between the two sexes---the legal subordination of one sex to another---is wrong in itself, and now one of the chief hindrances to human improvement; and that it ought to be replaced by a principle of perfect equality, admitting no power or privilege on the one side, nor disability on the other." (Pg. 15)
He observes, "When we put together three things---first, the natural attraction between opposite sexes; secondly, the wife's entire dependence on the husband, ever privilege or pleasure she has being either his gift, or depending entirely on his will; and lastly, that the principal object of human pursuit, consideration, and all objects of social ambition, can in general be sought or obtained by her only through him, it would be a miracle if the object of being attractive to men had not become the polar star of feminine education and formation of character. And this great means of influence over the minds of women having been acquired, an instinct of selfishness made men avail themselves of it to the utmost as a means of holding women in subjection, by representing to them meekness, submissiveness, and resignation of all individual will into the hands of a man, as an essential part of sexual attractiveness." (Pg. 31)
He argues, "It will not do... to assert in general terms, that the experience of mankind has pronounced in favour of the existing system. Experience cannot possibly have decided between two courses, so long as there has only been the experience of one... I deny that anyone knows, or can know, the nature of the two sexes, as long as they have only been seen in their present relation to one another.
"If men had ever been found in society without women, or women without men, or if there had been a society of men and women in which the women were not under the control of the men, something might have been positively known about the mental and moral differences which may be inherent in the nature of each. What is now called the nature of women is an eminently artificial thing---the result of forced repression in some directions, unnatural stimulation in others... no other class of dependents have had their character so entirely distorted form its natural proportions by their relations with their masters." (Pg. 37-38)
He points out, "What women by nature cannot do, it is quite superfluous to forbid them from doing. What they can do, but not so well as the men who are their competitors, competition suffices to exclude them from; since nobody asks for protective duties or bounties in favour of women; it is only asked that the present bounties and protective duties in favour of men should be recalled.
"If women have a greater natural inclination for some things than for others, there is no need of laws or social inculcation to make the majority of them do the former in preference to the latter. Whatever women's services are most wanted for, the free play of competition will hold out the strongest inducements to them to undertake... they are most wanted for the things for which they are the most fit; by the apportionment of which to them, the collective faculties of the two sexes can be applied on the whole with the greatest sum of valuable result." (Pg. 44)
Of "Those who attempt to force women into marriage by closing all other doors against them," he says, "If they mean what they say, their opinion must evidently be, that men do not render the married condition so desirable to women, as to induce them to accept it for its own recommendations." (Pg. 45)
He suggests, "the generality of the male sex cannot yet tolerate the idea of living with an equal. Were it not for that, I think that almost everyone... would admit the injustice of excluding half the human race from the greater number of lucrative occupations, and from almost all high social functions; ordaining from their birth that they are not, and cannot by any possibility become, fit for employments which are legally open to the stupidest and basest of the other sex, or else that however fit they may be, those employments shall be interdicted to them, in order to be preserved for the exclusive benefit of males." (Pg. 69)
He notes in the closing chapter, "Think what it is to a boy, to grow up to manhood in the belief that without any merit or exertion on his own, though he may be the most frivolous and empty or the most ignorant and stolid of mankind, by the mere fact of being born a male he is by right the superior of all and every one of an entire half of the human race: including probably some whose real superiority to himself he has daily or hourly occasion to feel; but even if in his whole conduct he habitually follows a woman's guidance, still, if he is a fool, he thinks that of course she is not, and cannot be, equal in judgment to himself; and if he is not a fool, he does worse---he sees that she is superior to him, and believes that, notwithstanding her superiority, he is entitled to command and she is bound to obey. What must be the effect on his character, of this lesson?" (Pg. 103-104)
Until the Women's Movement in the 1960s, this book [as Susan Brownmiller points out in her Introduction to the book] was commonly regarded as one of Mill's "minor" works. Fortunately, we can now see this as a historically pathbreaking work, that deserves serious study by anyone even remotely interested in women's rights.
September 28, 2020
Historically interesting, although displayed is a writer confused. 'On Liberty', a paean to individualism, and 'Utilitarianism', arguing for the greater good over self-interest are completely at odds with each other, and the author makes no attempt to reconcile the polar-opposite views. Further, Mill wrote 'Utilitarianism' before 'Liberty' but published 'Liberty' first, as the temperance movement was gaining strength, and while the Greater Good argument points towards temperance of fermented beverages, it seems Mill liked his hooch a little too much to give it up, and wrote 'Liberty' largely as an argument for the right to imbibe. As for the 'Subjection of Women', it still reads strongly today, especially when we have a president and party as of 2016 who wish to remove women's rights and liberties and take the nation back to the 1950s. 3.5/5
February 24, 2020
Wordy
Too complicated to understand well. Good concepts but not clear. Should use simple language in order to make his philosophy clear.
Too complicated to understand well. Good concepts but not clear. Should use simple language in order to make his philosophy clear.
March 7, 2020
It took me a couple years and a week to read this. The language is a little painful, but the ideas are interesting.
August 23, 2013
This book includes Mill's three most popular works: "On Ethics", "The Subjection of Women", and "Utilitarianism". "On Ethics" is Mill's call for individual freedom and the need for limiting government's reach into the private lives of its citizens. This is not the brand of destructively isolationist libertarianism espoused by psychopaths like Ayn Rand, but rather a pragmatic though principled version advocating civil liberties while emphasizing the importance of social responsibility.
"The Subjection of Women", written in the first half of the 19th century, is a brave and conscientious plea to the men of Mill's time to recognize women as equals. To us in the 21st century, the work is non-provocative and almost obvious; this is not a criticism of Mill as much as it is a nod to how far society has come in improving the lives of women in the western world. And just in case the solid rationality of empathy was not sufficient to argue the case for the broad education of women, Mill speaks to the most selfish of his male contemporaries by suggesting that stupid wives make for stupid husbands. Brilliant.
As for "Utilitarianism", I've reviewed that book elsewhere.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
"The Subjection of Women", written in the first half of the 19th century, is a brave and conscientious plea to the men of Mill's time to recognize women as equals. To us in the 21st century, the work is non-provocative and almost obvious; this is not a criticism of Mill as much as it is a nod to how far society has come in improving the lives of women in the western world. And just in case the solid rationality of empathy was not sufficient to argue the case for the broad education of women, Mill speaks to the most selfish of his male contemporaries by suggesting that stupid wives make for stupid husbands. Brilliant.
As for "Utilitarianism", I've reviewed that book elsewhere.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
February 11, 2012
On Liberty is the first philosophy book I ever read, and made a huge impact on my ~18 year old self. What seems like a simple argument became more nuanced and problematic after each reading, though, and it's only after reading it in conjunction with Utilitarianism that I was able to come to terms and resolve (to my own satisfaction, anyway), its ambiguities. The Subjection of Women is also a very fine text. If you're familiar with On Liberty and Utilitarianism, the arguments therein shouldn't come as much of a surprise, but it's absolutely worth reading as it is the most empirical of the three texts. Utilitarianism is straight-up abstraction. On Liberty is mostly abstract, with some examples. Subjection of Women is Mill (and almost certainly Harriet Taylor Mill) holding you by the hand and trying to show how the actual condition of women in Victorian England is tantamount to slavery, etc.
Finally, this edition of the book contains very valuable commentary in the endnotes. Miller's contribution really isn't trivial, and it helped me appreciate the text even more.
Finally, this edition of the book contains very valuable commentary in the endnotes. Miller's contribution really isn't trivial, and it helped me appreciate the text even more.
April 6, 2012
This volume contained three works: On Liberty, The Subjection of Women, and Utilitarianism. I must say that I was convinced by Mills' arguments on all three. On the first, I expected it to be perhaps too "liberal" and permissive. Though I do not believe it to be a very solid system as far as a means of governance, in that I do not feel it achievable among fragile humanity, its principles are good ideals to which to strive. On the second, while I've always believed in women's equality, I hadn't necessarily seen the raw [even evolutionary] naturalism of it. I had always felt the natural order (in the animal social meaning of the term) was man as provider and woman as caretaker, though equal in status. Mills places equality in historical context, however, and shows the logic of parity as natural indeed. On the third, well, I only have an amateur understanding and appreciation of philosophy, so I feel ill-equipped to comment.
October 20, 2007
"On Liberty" is heavy going at times, but Mill's arguments on privacy, free speech, and limits to government control feel highly relevant in the U.S. today.
I found his defense of free speech in the second chapter to be the most moving and persuasive that I've ever come across, and a reminder of the necessity of challenging and reasoning about our own beliefs. "Truth, thus held [as received opinion, without grounds or the ability to defend it] is but one superstition the more, accidentally clinging to the words which enunciate a truth."
I'll revisit this review if I read "The Subjection of Women" or "Utilitarianism."
I found his defense of free speech in the second chapter to be the most moving and persuasive that I've ever come across, and a reminder of the necessity of challenging and reasoning about our own beliefs. "Truth, thus held [as received opinion, without grounds or the ability to defend it] is but one superstition the more, accidentally clinging to the words which enunciate a truth."
I'll revisit this review if I read "The Subjection of Women" or "Utilitarianism."
April 18, 2007
I have read "On Liberty" and used it for one of my philosophy classes and am planning to read "The Subjection of Women" when I have the money to purchase a copy that I can mark up and put notes in the pages.
J.S. Mill is a philiosopher that writes in a way that is still accessible even if you are not a student of philosophy. He has great depth but not impervious density and can teach a lot on both political issues and philisophical.
J.S. Mill is a philiosopher that writes in a way that is still accessible even if you are not a student of philosophy. He has great depth but not impervious density and can teach a lot on both political issues and philisophical.
May 29, 2007
Mill is massively misinterpreted and misapplied which is exactly why everyone should his texts (especially “On Liberty”). When it comes to political theory, Mill is comparatively efficient with his words and yet still manages to be thorough with his logic. “The Subjection of Women” is hardly the traditional argument we see today for equal rights between the sexes; Mill’s logic rests on the revised utilitarian principles that characterize his strong empirical libertarianism.
February 1, 2009
Although I think this guy more or less meant well in his theories, he is such a pseudo-feminist. Why didn't he ever listen to his wife, Harriett Taylor? She was much more on target when it came to women's stuff.
Although his theories seem fine on the surface, when you look at them from a feminist perspective, they are completely botching to equal rights.
Just another example of ivory tower syndrome. He simply was unable to write beyond anything other than his own lens.
Although his theories seem fine on the surface, when you look at them from a feminist perspective, they are completely botching to equal rights.
Just another example of ivory tower syndrome. He simply was unable to write beyond anything other than his own lens.
January 19, 2016
This is a compilation of three of Mill's books. I have read the first two: On Liberty and Utilitarianism, but I have to finish The Subjection of Women. I have no plans on finishing that.
Excellent reading with issues that are still very relevant today.
Excellent reading with issues that are still very relevant today.
May 29, 2007
If you want to see a good fight, watch Kiran and I discuss the Subjection of Women. Its even better when we're in class and people don't know we're friends. Ha.
September 25, 2020
Three milestones in the history of liberalism, progressivism, and rational thinking.
Read
March 27, 2019Love John Stuart Mill!
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews