John Stuart Mill's Harm Principle Essay

John Stuart Mill crafted the “harm principle” in order to establish a reasonable basis of conduct within a structured society. The central thesis of this paper is, Mill’s “harm principle” allows governments to act in ways that will allow others to grow and purse happiness in a society. By examining Mill’s principle, the paper will show how governments are justified to interfere with an individual’s liberty. This argument will provide a reasonable bases of government intervention regarding human nature. Governments then have a right to control members of a society by means of coercion.

Government Coercion and Citizenry Will

Harm Principle The central idea of the “harm principle” is that a member of society can justifiably be coercion by the

Mill states that, “the conduct from which it is desired to deter him must be calculated to produce evil to someone else… If any one does an act hurtful to others, there is a prima facie case for punishing him, by law, or, where legal penalties are not safely applicable, by general disapprobation” (Mill, 1859). The state, by its existence as a sovereign body of order and protection and given powers to implement these ideals, has a right to punish those who do harm to others. It is then that the state must first establish that an evil has been committed; as was stated previously, it is when one coerces another in a way that detracts their liberty. Liberty is, “the inward domain of consciousness...absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects…doing as well like, subject to such consequences as may follow…freedom to unite” (Mill, 1859). Simply, Mill equates liberty with self-choice; and that these choices must exists within a societies laws and not violate other’s self-choices. In sum, the state has legal authority as an object of sovereignty and the powers that come with it to implement coercive punishments when one commits evil onto others; this then, is Mill’s “harm