In the introduction, Mill
says that “by liberty” is meant “protection against the tyranny of the
political rulers” only to further elaborate and say that protection includes
“protection against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling; against
the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own
ideas and practices as rules of conduction those who dissent from them; to
fetter the development, and, if possible, prevent the formation, of any
individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to
fashion themselves upon the model of its own.”
Chapter 2 on the liberty
of thought and discussion, Mill brings up a specific example of liberty that
needs to be protected. Mill talks about the freedom of expression and how no
government or majority or person can silence another persons opinion because
“we can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavoring to stifle is a false
opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still” (Mill 19). He
continues to say that you cannot suppress an opinion for being false because
how can we know that our opinion is true? He says, that “to refuse an opinion
because they are sure that it is false, is to assume that their certainty is
the same thing as absolute certainty” and that “all silencing of discussion is
an assumption of infallibility” (p19).
I agree with Mill that
there is something inherently wrong with believing someone else’s opinion is
false. You can surely disagree with another person, but that doesn’t mean that
they are wrong. When I read this, I thought about the current wedge driven
between the liberals and conservatives in America. Naturally, liberals think
conservatives are wrong and cruel natured to deny refugees homes, or deny
transgender people the right to choose a bathroom consistent with their
identity, or want to slight social welfare programs. However, if we think this
way and think that the opposition it wrong just because they have opposing
views, we are being tyrannical and prohibiting liberty. We cannot silence the
opinions of conservatives that our different from ours. At UMD last week an
article came out about how conservatives feel discriminated against on the
liberal campus. They said that even though people don’t necessarily tell them
they need to shut up they feel silenced. This is taking away their liberty,
even if accidentally.
To
identify if the other side is really wrong you need to find a fault in their
logic or belief and challenge that instead. You can use other philosopher, like
Plato and his theory of firms, to decide that there is a fault in their logic
and only then would it be ok to call their belief false.
I agree that tyranny of the majority in society can be a damaging, dangerous force that cuts out individual opinion. Many times, such as with dominant liberal culture, an overbearing opinion restricts other thoughts and invalidates them. However, it is important to note that some liberal views, such as abortion rights or allowing transgender students to choose bathrooms of the gender they identify with, preserve liberty and self-protection. When an unpopular or conservative opinion threatens similar issues of self-protection, causing dominant liberal backlash, the unpopular opinions do not warrant an interference with the right of liberty or protection of corresponding views. Thus, it is okay to have a dominance of one belief over another when the leading ideology preserves self-protection and minority welfare.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your indication of Mill's belief in a breadth of opinions being necessary for a healthy society, but I am not convinced that your examples would find support in Mill’s argument. In particular, barring trans people from using bathrooms that correspond with their gender is an action that society and, often, legislative bodies take against the right of an individual to perform an action that involves only that individual. The rights of others are not being violated when a trans person uses the bathroom since their presence would only be an affront to the opinion of someone who believes that exclusively cisgender people belong in a particular gendered bathroom. With that in mind, a person’s ability to use a particular bathroom concerns only that person, thus placing the action outside of the jurisdiction of society. While those who hold the opinion that only cis males belong in the men’s room and cis females belong in the women’s room may be able to disagree with that action, it does not permit them to violate a minority’s pursuit of their own good.
ReplyDeleteMill’s rhetoric certainly reminds me of the clichéd (and often misattributed to Voltaire), “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it”. The freedom of expression is intimately tied with what we perceive as American values, yet the question of censorship appears to be in vogue. Arguments in support of silencing discussion on certain topics make an a priori assumption of moral superiority (which goes hand in hand with Mill’s assumption of infallibility), ultimately leading to several quandaries. The ambiguity that is inherent in deciding which side of an argument holds this presumptive authority can lead to potentially precarious assumptions, thus it is best to avoid this prejudgement. Regardless of how scandalous a contention may be, it deserves the opportunity of deliberation, where an appropriate conclusion may be reached via some selected metric of reasoning.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your example of refusing an opinion, and while I identify as fairly liberal, it is important to note that the idea of false opinions is alive on campuses around the nation, whether they are extreme liberal or extreme conservative. In particular, our school has a habit of falsifying conservative ideals as a whole. This played a huge role in the experience on campus after Trump's election. There were plenty of students who would completely ignore or avoid contact with those who identified as even remotely conservative and voted for Trump. However, this took away their liberty.
ReplyDelete