Gjør som tusenvis av andre bokelskere
Abonner på vårt nyhetsbrev og få rabatter og inspirasjon til din neste leseopplevelse.
Ved å abonnere godtar du vår personvernerklæring.Du kan når som helst melde deg av våre nyhetsbrev.
John Stuart Mill's classic has at its heart a brave (some might say Quixotic) attempt to define both the constraints on individual freedom, and the degree of coercion governments may legitimately use to limit that freedom. His solution is a "very simple principle" - that one may coerce only to defend oneself or others from harm. This deceptively straightforward axiom has deep social consequences - it would, for example, ban all government intervention to make populations behave 'better'. The resulting ramifications have been argued over by social scientists for more than 150 years, and never more so than in modern times.
Even if [Bentham and Coleridge] had had no great influence they would still have been the classical examples they are of two great opposing types of mind. . . . And as we follow Mill's analysis, exposition and evaluation of this pair of opposites we are at the same time, we realize, forming a close acquaintance with a mind different from either.
Abonner på vårt nyhetsbrev og få rabatter og inspirasjon til din neste leseopplevelse.
Ved å abonnere godtar du vår personvernerklæring.