[MD] Mill: Quality philosopher

[Michael Hamilton]

Arlo,

On 6/2/06, Arlo Bensinger <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
> Do I have more or less "Flow" ability, and more or less "Flow" time, than
> the Indian? This is, to me, how one must address the question of "freedom".
>
> I say this mostly because "property ownership" has become a strong cultural
> marker of "freedom" in the West. But, I challenge the notion that this is
> not only not pan-cultural, but endemic of "freedom" overall. The Indian,
> remember, had no "property", and yet had (as best I can tell) every bit as
> much ability to "Flow" as I have. Now, those living under Stalinist rule
> had little ability to "Flow". That is, there WERE cultural values they
> wanted to pursue, but were restricted.
>
> You see what I'm saying? Freedom is not about doing what we "in the West"
> value, such as owning property, riding motorcycles and painting
> watercolors. Freedom is simply being able to do what you, through your
> linguaculture, have learned to value. As long as we agree on this, I find
> no problem in anything you've said. However, when one imposes, as Mill
> occasionally does, Western culturally valued activity on what it means to
> be "free" for anyone, any where, then I start to see things more and more
> problematically.
>
> Sorry for being longwinded...

No apology necessary - it's a crucial point. Some more Mill:
--------------
"The likings and dislikings of society, or of some powerful portion of
it, are thus the main thing which has practically determined the rules
laid down for general observance, under the penalties of law or
opinion. And in general, those who have been in advance of society in
thought and feeling, have left this condition of things unassailed in
principle, however they may have come into conflict with it in some of
its details. They have occupied themselves rather in inquiring what
things society ought to like or dislike, than in questioning whether
its likings or dislikings should be a law to individuals. They
preferred endeavouring to alter the feelings of mankind on the
particular points on which they were themselves heretical, rather than
make common cause in defence of freedom, with heretics generally."
--------------
Now, we in the West hardly consider the principles of property
ownership and free markets heretical. However, by imposing these
values elsewhere in the world, we are likewise guilty of asserting
"what things [other societies] ought to like or dislike" rather than
"questioning whether [our] likings or dislikings should be a law to
individuals [elsewhere]". In other words, we impose our social
traditions upon other societies, rather than acting for the cause of
genuine liberty.