By Gina Simmons
Generally, liberty entails a philosophical concept that identifies situations under which a person is considered to have the right to act in accordance with his or her own will. It is normally classified as positive or negative where negative liberty entails the absence of constraints or barriers and the positive one entails actions that provide an individual with a chance to take control of his life and realize his potentials (Carter, 2007). Negative liberty is confined to issues concerning an individual while positive liberty on the other hand encompasses issues concerning the society or a collective of individuals. From a political perspective, liberty is considered as the restoration or provision of economic and social freedom to the people. Since time immemorial, Liberty has taken different definitions as most individuals take it to mean provision of rights aimed at protecting the poor and weak in the society (Carter, 2007).
People vary in terms of their perception thus have different definitions or descriptions of liberty. The theory of liberty by John Mill is completely different from that in Aquinas thereby portraying the variation in the perception of liberty by individuals. This research paper focuses on evaluating and explaining the theory of liberty by John Mill and providing a comparison between his liberty descriptions relative to that in Aquinas.
In accordance with Mill (1985), liberty is classified into two categories which are characterized by action and coercion. With respect to action, liberty takes the definition that entails provision of the freedom to act while on coercion it encompasses prevention of oppression (Mill, 1985). Mill attempts to bring into focus the nature coupled with limitations of the power exercised by the society with respect to an individual. An argument that Mill devises and primarily uses is the harm principle. Through the harm principle, Mill provides insight on his notion of mutual liberty and that of tyranny. Regarding this principle, a person is equipped with the right to act on his own will provided the actions performed are not harmful to the society (Mill, 1985).
Considering Mill’s (1985) perspective, the society or government has no right to interfere with the actions of an individual if they are self regarding. However, the society can intervene and prevent people from continually harming themselves or destroying their properties. Since people do not live in isolation, harming oneself or ones property causes damages in the society. This type of liberty is essential since it takes the interest of the society and individual at heart. It ensures that individuals are provided with adequate freedom to do as they please thus not involved in activities such as slavery (Mill, 1985).
The works and thoughts of Thomas Aquinas focus on reconciling religion with reason. Aquinas insists that an individual’s senses represent their soul’s feelings and that the reason need to be presented with adequate facts. From Aquinas perception natural law is basically the rational participation of an individual in eternal laws made by God. Thomas Aquinas focused primarily on liberty of autonomous people in conducting their affairs via rational persuasion and civil conversation (Aquinas, 2002).
In his definition, Aquinas placed much value on practical order of the society through which every person is provided control over his own liberty by cultivating virtues and habits. Despite Aquinas not forming a notion on natural rights, in accordance with his liberty perception all men are equal in spite of their variation in capabilities, talents, and callings. The society from Aquinas’ theory entails the mutual exchange of commodities and ideas where each person contributes for the sake of provision of good life (Aquinas, 2002).
From Aquinas’ (2002) liberty definition, the government has limited rights over an individual thus cannot function beyond certain demarcated points. Unlike Mill’s liberty definition, Aquinas’ (2002) definition posits that the role of the government is bound by human nature laws that are derived from God, the Creator of man. To avoid inconsistency with the human nature, Aquinas insists that positive laws need to be just and emanated from principles of natural law. According to Aquinas (2002), human laws should be constructed to ensure that the society is orderly. Unlike Aquinas liberty definition that focuses on religion, Mill’s does not entail religion.
Article kindly provided by UberArticles.com
Topics: Miscellaneous | Comments Off
MLA Style Citation:
Simmons, Gina "Comparing Liberty Definition According To John Stewart Mill And Thomas Aquinas." Comparing Liberty Definition According To John Stewart Mill And Thomas Aquinas. 27 Jun. 2010. uberarticles.com. 27 May 2015 <http://uberarticles.com/miscellaneous/comparing-liberty-definition-according-to-john-stewart-mill-and-thomas-aquinas/>.
APA Style Citation:
Simmons, G (2010, June 27). Comparing Liberty Definition According To John Stewart Mill And Thomas Aquinas. Retrieved May 27, 2015, from http://uberarticles.com/miscellaneous/comparing-liberty-definition-according-to-john-stewart-mill-and-thomas-aquinas/
Chicago Style Citation:
Simmons, Gina "Comparing Liberty Definition According To John Stewart Mill And Thomas Aquinas" uberarticles.com. http://uberarticles.com/miscellaneous/comparing-liberty-definition-according-to-john-stewart-mill-and-thomas-aquinas/
Comments are closed.
Uber Articles and its partner sites cannot be held responsible for either the content nor the originality of any articles. If you believe the article has been stolen from you without your permission, please contact us and we will remove it immediately. If you have a problem with the accuracy or otherwise of the content of an article, please contact the author, not us! Also, please remember that any opinions and ideas presented in any of the articles are those of the author and cannot be taken to represent the opinions of Uber Articles. All articles are provided for informational purposes only. None of them should be relied upon for medical, psychological, financial, legal, or other professional advice. If you need professional advice, see a professional. We cannot be held responsible for any use or misuse you make of the articles, nor can we be held responsible for any claims for earnings, cures, or other results that the article might make.