Public and Private

Individual Freedom

John Stuart Mill in his book On Liberty looked at what a sovereign could legitimately do to his/her subjects. His corollary was the ‘harm principle’. It created certain restraint upon a ruler, being the only reason that force should be used against another is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral is no justification: Mill, Page 108 (1984). Mill’s ‘harm principle’ though was initially a more constricted in standpoint, offensive conduct for example was not a condition. Nor was expression. As far as Mill would have been concerned, I, as a academic should have no restriction from publishing that corn farmers starve the poor. This is irrespective of whether its worth is veracious. Contrary, if I were to say the words to an angry congregation of hillbilly’s outside a corn farmers housing, the sovereign should have the right to sanction my actions, and punish for the causation of such actions. Mill’s approach is highly individualistic. As long as our actions do not affect others then there is no reason not to continue, even if it is immoral. If we allow people to curtail our liberties on utilitarianism grounds then the majority, who inevitably, because of their prejudices, will make mistakes, and should be disqualified to force their contentions upon those it does not affect.

Unlike Mill’s account of liberty, both Rawl’s and Dworkin’s rely upon two precepts of ‘right’ and ‘good’. Rather than focusing on the negative they convolute Mill’s assertion of ‘harm’ and trade it for negative state intervention in maintaining the good life. The good life, which is another illusory concoction, whereby the states intervention is neutral, is only noticeable when an individual’s conception of good contravenes the moral normative.

Pornography

Obscene material is often prohibited under law conscribing to moral indecency, or, possibly the tendency or potentialiality to corrupt the individual. There is a distinction betwixt erotica and pornography, where erotica distinguishes equal enjoyment between consenting adults, the latter subjectifies women as inferior, dehumanised and nothing more than sexual objects: Mackinon, Page 238, (1985). Therefore, pornography harms women in multifarious ways; from physical sexual abuse, psychological insecurities and sexual discrimination becoming acceptable precepts for its subscribers.

Next: Justice