PHIL. 410A:
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS FOR WEEKS #3 AND #4
ON MILL, HAYEK, AND SEN
NOTE: The Hayek and Sen readings are optional, not required.
NOTE: In Chapter 1 of On Liberty, on page 18, line 2 (Prometheus edition),
"neither" should be "either". The sentence should read: “A person may cause evil to others not only
by his actions but by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable
to them for the injury.”
WEEK #3: Utilitarian
1. In Chapter 1,
Mill announces one simple principle and then gives three different versions of
it. What are they? One version of the principle is called the
Harm Principle (it is the only one with the word "harm" in it). What does Mill mean by "harm"? [Do not overlook his discussion of
"positive duties" on p. 17.
2. The third
version of Mill's principle defines a protected sphere of negative
liberty. How is the protected sphere
defined? How does Mill’s protected
sphere differ from Thomson’s natural claims?
3. Mill's argument
for liberty of thought and discussion is one of the most famous in political
philosophy. Actually, there is more than
one argument. Summarize Mill's
arguments. What empirical premises do
his arguments depend on? Are the empirical premises
true?
4. Does Mill
believe that the right to freedom of thought and discussion is absolute? Does he believe that limits on freedom of
expression are ever justified?
5. What does Mill
mean by "individuality"? He
gives two arguments for protecting rights to individuality. What are they?
WEEK #4:
1. Mill claims
that each individual has a private sphere of actions which only concern herself/himself? How
successful is he in defending this claim?
[Consider, especially, the argument that begins at the bottom of page
90.] What empirical premises does it
depend on?
2. In a Millian society, would any drugs be illegal? Which types of government regulation of drugs
would be permissible, and which would not?
[Be sure to provide citations to support your views.]
3. Sabbatarian legislation.
Mill opposes laws that restrict recreational activities on Sunday but
does not oppose laws that restrict working on Sunday. What is the difference?
4. Does Mill think
that people should be free to become slaves?
Why or why not?
5. Would Mill have
supported a right of those with terminal illnesses to commit suicide or to
obtain assistance in ending their lives?
Explain.
6. Hayek claims
that the only way to prevent coercion is by the threat of coercion (p.
21). Do you agree that government should
minimize coercion?
7. Fallibilism. Both
Mill and Hayek are fallibilists—they believe that everyone
should acknowledge that their beliefs may be mistaken. Consider how Mill and Hayek might reply to
the following argument: If the you acknowledge that your own views may be mistaken, why
should anyone accept what you say about the advantages of liberty? [Support your reply with citations to the
Mill and Hayek texts.]
8
Hayek believes that progress = the growth of civilization = the
growth of knowledge. Provide cites for
this equivalence. What does he mean by
knowledge?
9. According to Hayek,
what are the important elements of one's protected sphere? How does Hayek's account differ from
Thomson's? How does Hayek's account
differ from Mill's?
10. Economic
Progress Without Political Freedom. Is Mill's advocacy of freedom of thought and
discussion and of tolerating individuality based on a mistake? When Mill looked at 19th century British
society, he was overwhelmed by the stifling effects of conformity. When he wanted to give his audience an
example of the extreme of "the despotism of custom", he pointed to
"the East", particularly
11. One way of stating
the argument for economic progress over political freedom is to claim that
"you can't eat a right to freedom of expression or other political
rights". Amartya
Sen has done extensive research on famines. Why does he believe that freedom of
expression and other political rights can help to eliminate famines?