Mill on Self-Regarding Actions

C. L. Ten

doi:10.1017/S0031819100008834

Mill on Self-Regarding Actions

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 February 2009

C. L. Ten

Show author details

C. L. Ten: Affiliation:
University of Singapore.

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

In the essay On Liberty, Mill put forward his famous principle that society may only interfere with those actions of an individual which concern others and not with actions which merely concern himself. The validity of this principle depends on there being a distinction between self-regarding and other-regarding actions. But the concept of self-regarding actions has been severely criticised on the ground that all actions affect others in some way and are therefore other-regarding. The notion of self-regarding actions appears to be completely discredited. Very recently, however, there has been some dissatisfaction with the traditional debunking of Mill on this score. Two serious and important attempts to reinterpret the principle were made by Mr J. C. Rees in an article entitled ‘A Re-Reading of Mill on Liberty’, and by Mr Alan Ryan in two brief but extremely useful contributions. My aim is to discuss these reinterpretations of Mill, and on the basis of this, build up what I think is the correct account of Mill's notion of self-regarding actions.

Type: Articles
Information: Philosophy , Volume 43 , Issue 163 , January 1968 , pp. 29 - 37

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0031819100008834 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy 1968

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

^{page 29 note 1} On Liberty (Everyman's Library) pp. 72–3Google Scholar. All references to the essay are to this edition.

^{page 29 note 2} Political Studies, Vol. 8, 1960, pp. 113–129.Google Scholar

^{page 29 note 3} ‘Mr McCloskey on Mill's Liberalism’, Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 14, 1964, pp. 253–260Google Scholar and ‘John Stuart Mill's art of living’, The Listener, 10 21, 1965, pp. 620–2.Google Scholar

^{page 30 note 1} Op. cit., p. 119.Google Scholar

^{page 30 note 2} (Everyman's Library), p. 16.Google Scholar

^{page 30 note 3} Op. cit., p. 120.Google Scholar

^{page 31 note 1} On Liberty, p. 75. (My italics.)Google Scholar

^{page 31 note 2} Loc. cit.

^{page 31 note 3} Ibid., pp. 70–1.

^{page 32 note 1} Ibid., p. 71.

^{page 32 note 2} Ibid., p. 142.

^{page 32 note 3} Loc. cit.

^{page 32 note 4} Ibid., p. 138.

^{page 32 note 5} Loc. cit.

^{page 33 note 1} Ibid., p. 74.

^{page 34 note 1} Philosophy, Politics and Society, Second Series, edited by Laslett, Peter and Runciman, W. G., pp. 150–1.Google Scholar

^{page 34 note 2} Ibid., pp. 152f.

^{page 34 note 3} Mill on Bentham, edited by Leavis, F. R., pp. 48–9.Google Scholar

^{page 34 note 4} The Principles of Morals and Legislation, Ch. V, Sec. XI.

^{page 35 note 1} On Liberty, p. 140.Google Scholar

^{page 35 note 2} Ibid., p. 115.

^{page 35 note 3} Ibid., p. 125.

^{page 36 note 1} Ibid., p. 149.

^{page 36 note 2} Ibid., p. 117

^{page 36 note 3} Ibid., p. 125.

Article contents

Mill on Self-Regarding Actions

Extract

Access options

References

Save article to Kindle

Save article to Dropbox

Save article to Google Drive

Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

You have entered the maximum number of contributors

Conflicting interests