Sex I have been reading Kant recently and have wondered what his stance would be on homosexuality, not in marriage, but just in general.
On Liberty Mill's On Liberty addresses the nature and limits of the power that can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual. However Mill is clear that his concern for liberty does not extend to all individuals and all societies.
He states that "Despotism is a legitimate mode of government in dealing with barbarians". He also argues that individuals should be prevented from doing lasting, serious harm to themselves or their property by the harm principle.
Because no one exists in isolation, harm done to oneself may also harm others, and destroying property deprives the community as well as oneself.
Though this principle seems clear, there are a number of complications. For example, Mill explicitly states that "harms" may include acts of omission as well as acts of commission. Thus, failing to rescue a drowning child counts as a harmful act, as does failing to pay taxesor failing to appear as a witness in court.
All such harmful omissions may be regulated, according to Mill. By contrast, it does not count as harming someone if — without force or fraud — the affected individual consents to assume the risk: Mill does, however, recognise one limit to consent: In these and other cases, it is important to bear in mind that the arguments in On Liberty are grounded on the principle of Utility, and not on appeals to natural rights.
The question of what counts as a self-regarding action and what actions, whether of omission or commission, constitute harmful actions subject to regulation, continues to exercise interpreters of Mill.
It is important to emphasise that Mill did not consider giving offence to constitute "harm"; an action could not be restricted because it violated the conventions or morals of a given society. On Liberty involves an impassioned defense of free speech.
Mill argues that free discourse is a necessary condition for intellectual and social progress. We can never be sure, he contends, that a silenced opinion does not contain some element of the truth.
He also argues that allowing people to air false opinions is productive for two reasons. First, individuals are more likely to abandon erroneous beliefs if they are engaged in an open exchange of ideas. Second, by forcing other individuals to re-examine and re-affirm their beliefs in the process of debate, these beliefs are kept from declining into mere dogma.
It is not enough for Mill that one simply has an unexamined belief that happens to be true; one must understand why the belief in question is the true one. Along those same lines Mill wrote, "unmeasured vituperation, employed on the side of prevailing opinion, really does deter people from expressing contrary opinions, and from listening to those who express them.
Helen was the daughter of Harriet Taylor and collaborated with Mill for fifteen years after her mother's death in Social liberty and tyranny of majority[ edit ] This section needs additional citations for verification.
Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
April Learn how and when to remove this template message Mill believed that "the struggle between Liberty and Authority is the most conspicuous feature in the portions of history". He introduced a number of different concepts of the form tyranny can take, referred to as social tyranny, and tyranny of the majority.
Social liberty for Mill meant putting limits on the ruler's power so that he would not be able to use his power on his own wishes and make decisions which could harm society; in other words, people should have the right to have a say in the government's decisions.
He said that social liberty was "the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual". It was attempted in two ways: However, in Mill's view, limiting the power of government was not enough.May 26, · Questions To Ask Advocates Of Homosexual Marriage (Part 1) But why would he have to agree with those arguments upfront?
I can make a case for my view of Christianity, More generally, it’s difficult to see what all the fuss is about concerning same-sex marraige – it means some homosexuals can now get married, and Author: Triablogue. Essay Utilitarian & Kantian View on Same Sex Marraige Words | 4 Pages. gays and lesbians be allowed to marry?
43% say yes. 47% say no. 10% are unsure. 1 Barbara Herman’s opening remarks in her essay, “Could it be Worth Thinking about Kant on Sex and Marriage” () are representative in their caution: “Kant’s views on sex, women, and marriage would best be forgotten by.
[Content warning: Discussion of social justice, discussion of violence, spoilers for Jacqueline Carey books.] [Edit 10/ This post was inspired by a debate with a friend of a friend on Facebook who has since become somewhat famous.
Essay Utilitarian & Kantian View on Same Sex Marraige Words | 4 Pages.
gays and lesbians be allowed to marry? 43% say yes. 47% say no. 10% are unsure. In a similar way, in the same long poem, I "translate" a new story, set on a journey around the world by airplane from New Zealand to England, pretty much line for line on top of the first Canto of the _Cantos of Ezra Pound_.
not going to allow the cumulative wisdom and judgment of generations and multitudes of others to affect how we view.