Learning Record Form

Supichaya Nobnom
• Date: 5th January 2018
• Questions:
• Who is John Stuart Mill?
• What was he famous for?
• Where did he come from?
• When was he born?
• What is utilitarianism?
• Summary:
• John Stuart Mill is an English philosopher, economist, and exponent of Utilitarianism.
• He was famous for his contribution to social and political theory, particularly in liberalism.
• He came from England.
• He was born in 20th May 1806.
• Utilitarianism is defined as a theory that concerns about moral and how the majority can gain the most benefit.
• Analysis and Opinions:
• Based on the information I have found, I think John Stuart Mill was a philosopher who concerned a lot about maximizing happiness for all people. The reason why he
concerned about the moral theories may be because of his passionate in work of liberalism. These basic information about John Stuart Mill is very helpful to do
further research and think of more questions about his background and how he got interested in the theory of liberalism and utilitarianism.
• References:
• Anschutz, R. P. (n.d.). John Stuart Mill. Retrieved January 5, 2018, from Encylopaedia Britannica : https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Stuart-Mill
• Mastin, L. (2008). Utilitarianism. Retrieved January 5, 2018, from The Basics of Philosophy: http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_utilitarianism.html
• Date: 8th January 2018
• Questions:
• What do I already know about Plato?
• What are some of Plato’s main ideas?
• What are Plato’s political ideas?
• Summary:
• I don’t know anything about him.
• Main ideas:
• World of forms: Idealistic (Plato believes in perfectness)
• Forms are the ideal versions of the things we see around us: our own reality is comprised of imperfect copies of ideal forms .
• Philosophers should try to understand the perfect forms so they can solve our misleading reality.
• When we all die, we will go to the world of forms where it is perfect.
• We will eventually reborn and come back to build the world of forms in our actual world.
• Thinking about the world of forms and trying to reach it.
• Political ideas:
• Utopia should be led by a philosopher king.
• Society should be divided into three groups; military, rulers, and producers.
• The noble lie: people are born with gold, silver, or a mixture of brass and iron in our souls which determine our roles in life.
• Leading class should be a philosopher. (Philosophers have more resources and more educational, but do not want to rule)
• The philosophers should be the one who rule (less corruption).
• People who like to question a lot are the philosophers because they asked for better ideas and push for better systems. (Humans’ nature is normally refuse to change.)
• Analysis and Opinions:
• I think Plato’s political ideal is not very realistic. What he believed about how people go through incarnation in order to develop the actual world seems to be an idea that nobody can
actually prove. People do not know where they have to go when they all die and therefore there is no evidence to back up the idea of the world of forms. However, I agree with his
idea about people who questioned a lot are the philosophers. I believe that people who are always seeking for a better system will have more opportunity to experience new things.
This will eventually lead to the process of initiating new ideas and trying to push for a better system for the world. In contrast, the conservative people will tend to stick with those old
ideas and refuse to changes as they would believe that the system that they are living in is already good. Thus, there will be no improvements initiated by conservative people.
• References:
• Classroom notes
• Date: 12th January 2018

• Questions:
• What are some of Aristotle’s political ideas?
• What are the differences between Plato’s and Aristotle’s ideas?

• Summary:
• Aristotle focuses on the ideas that are more realistic and more observable than Plato’s.
• His views are often based on what is testable.
• He made some uses of the political ideas during that time to discuss about their strengths and flaws.
• The importance of private property and self-interestedness:
• It is more effective to have properties directly owned privately. Plato, in contrary, said that properties should be publicized.
• Aristotle and the Middle class:
• Middle class should be the ruler of the society because it balanced between the rich and the poor. This will help to reduce the gap between different classes within the society. Whereas, Plato believes that the upper class
(people with more knowledges and resources) should become the ruler.
• We must avoid political extremes:
• Citizens should not be able to have political roles since they will assume other people’s interests (People will assume that everyone would want the same materials as they do).
• Laws that lean toward a certain political side will cause inequality.
• If the rich are in power, then they will disregard the poor and will only focus on their personal needs.
• The laws create discontent between people and create damages between the society.
• If the political system is always being changed by extreme people, then the whole system will eventually collapse. (No political system in the end)
• Education must support the political system:
• A government will not long stand if the citizens ignore the principle of the society.
• Education plays an important role for sustaining the government.
• He defines democracy as the society is controlled by the majority and freedom.
• He believes that political system should aim to fulfill the needs of many while still protecting the individuals.

• A government that is balanced and allows representation of all peoples. Meaning if adapts and changes to support the people’s needs. It learns from its mistakes and improves to find the balance. This does not mean that we will not
make mistakes, because there is no perfect government system and all we can do is experiment and adapt. (He does not believe in a fix system)

• Analysis and Opinions:

• In my opinion, I think Aristotle’s ideas tended to be more applicable in real life than Plato’s. It is realistic and people can actually experience it themselves. Not only being real, I also think Aristotle’s ideas can eliminate many conflicts
that are occurring in nowadays. For instance, believing that middle class should be the ruler of the society would partly help to reduce the problem of the gap between different classes in the society. The middle class would be able
to fulfill the needs for both the upper and the lower class. Moreover, I also agree with his ideas about how the ignorance from citizens in a country can lead to a collapse of a government. I believe the leaders will not be able to lead
without the support from their citizens and therefore the government will not long stand. Despite the strength of this political idea from Aristotle, I think that it may not help to elevate the quality of people’s life as much as Plato’s
idea. This is due to the fact that Plato’s political idea was based on perfect world of forms. People believing in this will try to seek for better changes in order to reach the perfect world and thus developing themselves at all time.

• References:
• Socrates. (2015, October 2). Four Important Lessons from Aristotle’s "The Politics". Retrieved January 12, 2018, from Classical Wisdom Weekly: http://classicalwisdom.com/lessons-the-politics/
• Date: 15th January 2018

• Questions:
• What are the differences between Hobbes’ and Locke’s ideas?

• Summary:

Hobbes
• Absolute monarchy.
• Without any form of government, humans would be in a
state of constant warfare with one another. (Humans are
like selfish creatures)
• Absolute monarchy would be the only government form
that would be able to hold humanity's cruelty.
• Within this form of government, the king would hold the
supreme power.
• Believed in social contract theory: a ruler has an
unspoken, implicit contract with his people requiring him
to reign fairly. (the monarch gained unlimited power once
the contract was implicitly recognized)
• Almost total power to the monarch.
• People do not have the right to rebel.
• We give anything to the government because without it
we have nothing. (The government is necessary)
Locke
• Limited monarchy.
• Humans are good and wise when placed in a natural state:
they normally work to improve their life position and
community they are living in.
• Severely limited in its power by the power and will of the
monarch’s collective subjects. (The monarch’s power is
limited by the collective subjects)
• Also believed in social contract theory. But the social
contract between a monarch and his subjects was
supposed to be continuously checked by the others.
• The contract can be broken by the will of people.
• People can overthrown the government and the monarchy
if they started to rule unfairly. OR if the monarch ruled in
the way that hamper the community forward’s progress, it
is justify to remove them out of the government.

• Analysis and Opinions:

• The two main differences between Hobbes’ and Locke’s ideas is how they viewed humans being and how the monarch is being ruled. While Hobbes believed that humans were no
different from selfish creatures when having no government controlling, Locke believed that humans will instead seek for better life quality. Moreover, Hobbes also thought that the best
form of government for people is absolute monarch. People do not have any right to rebel and the monarch can gain unlimited power. Locke, however, thought that the monarch’s power
should be limited and that all people have the ability to overthrown them when they hamper into the community forward’s progress. Although I think that humans are very competitive, I
disagree with Hobbes about his idea on comparing humans to selfish creatures. I believe that humans are not actually selfish creatures, yet they are trying to find the best solution in
which benefits themselves the most. Also, I think his government system of absolute monarchy may lead more conflicts as people do not have any voice within the society.

• References:
• D, J. (n.d.). Locke versus Hobbes. Retrieved January 2018, 15, from https://jim.com/hobbes.htm
• Date: 19th January 2018
• Questions:
• Who is Rousseau?
• What are his main ideas?
• What is the state of nature like in his view?
• What are his thoughts on society?
• What impacts did his ideas have on history?
• Summary:
• Rousseau was a philosopher in the 18th century who disagree with the idea of civilization. (The society is actually not progressing.)
• Modern life is fulfilled with the idea of progress: developing from savagery to prosperity and civilization.
• He valued the primitive over the civilized.
• He believed that civilization and progress did not improve people. It actually destroy the morality of humans being, which had once been good.
• Individuals had once been good and happy, but they were bothered by vice (bad things) and sin when they started to join the society.
• The state of nature:
• People lived in a forest and never entered a shop.
• They were considered to be more understandable with their own minds because they did not have these technologies to compete for.
• Civilization created an unhealthy form of self-love, causing people to be selfish. (Increasing the level of pride and jealousy among the people in the society)
• This idea of forming unhealthy form of self-love was initiated as people started to compare themselves to others, trying to imitate other people. This
eventually led to competitions for money and lost sight of their own sensation.
• The modern world ruined people's life who used to live in the state of nature.
• Invented the child-centered education: Children were born naturally good. The key for raising children was preventing their corruption by society.
• Summary:
• Social contract (principles of political rights): the expression of Rousseau’s idea which is based on the idea that Individuals inherent rights since they were born.
• The job of good of government is
• To leave individuals alone.
• To empower them through education and provisions of resources for the society.
• The government should stay out of the society.
• They were derived from the people.
• He believed in inherited monarchy.
• Democratic and limited government that would stay out away of the humans’ interaction. Only provide protection to the people. (The same system as the
libertarianism)
• He became the philosophical voice of the French Revolution:
• His sayings became the battle cries because people used them to provoke the crowd and to overthrow the monarchy in France.
• It was also used to excuse the abuses of revolutionary France when things were out of control.
• High belief in the individual and low belief in government, which is why he did not see any stable government at that time.
• His thought was the idea of the noble savage that a man in nature was an amazing creature. But the problem was people had become too socialized.
• He spent time arguing about the nobility of the slave but it did not help the situation on the abuses at that time to get better.
• He wanted people to be left alone/largely on their own devices.
• People who followed Rousseau’s idea most strongly were during the French revolution. His followers became the terrorists, causing the event to be full of violence and
bloody.
• Rousseau did not want a maternal government because it would weaken the individuals’ rights.
• Analysis and Opinions:
• Rousseau’s political theory was based on valuing the primitive and the nature of humans over the civilization. He believed in the state of nature, where all humans being
are born good. But, it is the society as a whole that pushed people to become more aggressive, selfish, and full of jealousy. Besides this, Rousseau also thought that the
government’s job was only to provide resources and protection. Most importantly, it should never violate people’s right. In my opinion, I agree with his idea where he said
that the society caused humans to create unhealthy form of self-love. I believe that a lot people in nowadays conform themselves in order to fit into the society, though
sometimes they did not actually willing to do it. It is clear that people who are exposed to different kinds of environment tend to develop varieties of behaviours. Hence, I
think Rousseau was right about the state of nature and how civilization did not actually improve people’s life. Moreover, I think his ideas had a lot of impact to the French
revolution. His ideas were the reason why people started to overthrow the monarchy and worsening the event at that time.
• References:
• Foundation, W. L. (2016, November 28). "The Social Contract" by Jean Jacques Rousseau. Retrieved from Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsV3pZnDeXU
• Life, T. S. (2015, August 14). POLITICAL THEORY – Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Retrieved from Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81KfDXTTtXE
• Date: 22th January 2018

• Questions:
• Who is Machiavelli?
• What is a good leader like in Machiavelli’s point of view?
• Why does he think it is impossible to be a good person and a good ruler at the same time?
• What virtues does Machiavelli believe that leaders should have? What are criminal virtues?

• Summary:
• Machiavelli was political advisor and political theorist in the late 15th century. (Being a good Christian was incompatible with being a good leader )
• A good politician in his view is not the one who is kind, friendly, and honest. But the leader should be the one who knows how to defend, enrich and bring honour to the state. What
citizens most need from their ruler is effectiveness. But, effectiveness and niceness cannot exist at the same time.
• It is almost impossible to be a good politician and good person at the same time. (A good Christian cannot be a good person at once)
• Because he thought that a good leader could not be too kind or generous.
• The responsibility of a good prince is to defend the state from external and internal threat, which means that he must know how to fight.
• Fear is more important because he believed that people should be under control of the leader.
• A nice guy in politics will eventually become threat by other people who are more strong.
• People who are kind and nice will not be successful at all.
• A leader would do well if that person follow the virtue which composed of wisdom, strategy, strength, bravery, and ruthlessness (ไร ้ความปรานี ).
• A leader should also have criminal virtue. This term was used to describe the necessary ability of leader to be cruel in the name of the state, but still good as leader.
• Bad values that is good and effective for a leader to have: Being tough but not too tough.
• Good example of a good leader in his point of view: Took the general who started to uprising at that time and cut him in half. Placed him in the middle of the city in order to show
people that everybody should fear him and to remind them who the true boss was. People during that period did not have any right to upraise because if they started to do so,
they would be killed by the government.
• People cannot be good at all things. Not only because of the limited abilities resources, but also because of the conflict within moral codes.
• Difficult decisions = ethical trade-offs: people may have to lie in order to keep a relationship afloat. Or, people may have to ignore a certain feeling of the employees in
order to keep the business going.

• Analysis and Opinions:

• I felt like Machiavelli’s ideology is quite extreme in term of demanding for power and respect from his citizens. Based on the video shown in class, I totally disagree with his point of view
on how a good politician should behave. I think that it is unnecessary for a leader to be cruel and mean to the citizens, yet it is important that the person who lead the country will listen to
all problems and try to understand all classes of people in the society. Also, I think that the idea of being tough but not too tough is not very showing the effectiveness of the ruler. In my
opinion, this example actually represented how the politician uses force in an abusive way. Referring back to the political system we have studied before, I think Machiavelli’s ideas
sounded similar to the oligarchy political system. Both of these ideologies displayed the concept of how a group of people can use force to empower individuals, keeping the people under
their control at all time. Without using force, they believed that the ruler will not be very effective and therefore they should remain unfriendly and cruel in order to keep the country out
of any threat.

• References:
• Life, T. S. (2015, June 19). POLITICAL THEORY –Niccolò Machiavelli. Retrieved from Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOXl0Ll_t9s&t=1s
• Date: 23rd January 2018
• Questions:
• Who is John Stuart Mill?
• What is utilitarianism? (the end justify the mean, focus on the outcome)
• What is deontology?
• Summary:
• A British philosopher who was best known for the utilitarianism idea.
• Utilitarianism is a set of ethics. It was about cultivating a noble sense of individuals, seeking for the best solution in order to ensure the happiness for all.
(even it meant personal loss from one of them)
• He stated that ‘the most moral action’ is always the action that provides the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people
• When his idea was first proposed, many readers thought that his ideas encouraged selfishness, trying to maximize personal happiness at the
expenses of others’ happiness.
• His thinking was often describe as ‘consequentialist’ as it judges morality in term of the outcome of the action. He argued that the happiness is not
only based on one person, but the happiness of the mass of the people.
• Example of Utilitarianism: It is better to send a group of soldiers to preserve the rest of the lives and happiness of people in the country.
• The problem of this theory is that we do not know the outcome.
• Deontology is the ethic that focus on the rightness and wrongness of the actions itself, which is opposite to the theory of consequentialism.
• Consequentialism is similar to the term utilitarianism, but the utilitarianism only focus on the happiness of the people.
• Neither of them are based on intention, because it is hard to prove.
• Analysis and Opinions:
• In my opinion, I do not agree with both of these ideas because I think that they were too extreme. People should take both of the perspectives into
consideration to display a moderate practice. In other words, the actions and the outcomes are equally important. If only the idea of utilitarianism is used, I
believe that a lot of innocent people may suffered or people may have to sacrifice themselves in order to save the majority. On the other hand, if the idea of
deontology is only implemented, people will not have as much as motivation to become successful. Therefore, I think that both of the theories should be
displayed at the same time as it would help to lessen the level of risk in becoming successful as well as elevate the quality of the process.
• References:
• Macat. (2015, October 13). An Introduction to John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism - A Macat Politics Analysis. Retrieved from Youtube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6LD5-2oj7DA
• Mmartin, L. (2008). Retrieved from The Basic of Philosophy: http://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_deontology.htm
• Date: 26th January 2018
• Questions:
• Who is Herbert Spencer?
• What were his ideas?
• What is Social Darwinism?
• How is it different than evolution?
• What does Social Darwinism have in common with Darwin’s theories of evolution?
• Where did Survival of the Fittest come from, and what does it mean?
• Summary:
• Herbert Spencer was a philosopher and social idealist in 19th century.
• His ideas were based on the theory of ‘survival of the fit’ from Charles Darwin.
• Charles Darwin stated that people who have suitable traits to the nature will be able to reproduce and pass on their traits to the next generation.
• Spencer developed Charles’s idea and called it ‘survival of the fittest’. This implied that people who were most fit would be superior over the others in the society.
• He focused on the idea of utilitarianism. (Maximizing the benefits for the society even if we have to remove the weaker people out.)
• He also thought that justice was important for all people. Because of this, people who succeeded would be naturally superior to whose do not. BUT it does not give
them permission to treat the weak badly.
• Later on, people took his ideas and interpret them in a cruel wrong way. They used the idea of ‘survival of the fittest’ as an excuse to try and remove the weak
people from the society. This was not Spencer’s goal in the first place though.
• Social Darwinism is a theory which believed that people who succeed in the society were superior to those who did not succeed. This theory also support the term eugenic,
which refers to the practice of removing unwanted genetic material from the gene pool. In other words, people in the higher class would try to remove people in the lower
class.
• Differences:
• In evolution, the ones that are fit enough to reproduce and pass on their genes to the new generation would be able to survive. While social Darwinism would favour
only the fittest one. Thus, the superior would try to remove the unfit ones from the society by exploiting them in many different ways.
• In evolution, Darwin suggested that the fits one that can adapt themselves to the society would be able to pass on their traits. But, the idea of Social Darwinism
believed that the rich people were ‘naturally’ the fittest and the poor people were ‘naturally’ weak and unfit. (The theory of Social Darwinism is no longer accepted
because they are based on the wrong interpretation of the theory of evolution)
• Both of the theories focused on how competition can affect the status of lives in the society. The evolution theories concluded that natural selection would choose the
species that could adapt themselves best to the environment, meaning that only the one that fit to the surroundings will be able to pass on their traits to the next
generation. At the same time, the theory of social Darwinism also concluded that the person who succeed in the society would be able to rule over the others.
• The idea of survival of the fittest came from Herbert Spencer. It was originally developed from Charles Darwin, who proposed ‘survival of the fit’. Survival of the fittest
basically means that people who were the most fit would survive the world and would be naturally superior to the weak ones.
• Analysis and Opinions:
• Among all of the other ideologies, I think Spencer’s is the most realistic one. This ideology may sound cruel to a lot of people, yet I think it is what most of the rich are
doing in nowadays. It is commonly seen that poor people are usually suffered from bad working conditions, low salaries, and sometimes discrimination. Many of them
decided to leave their workplaces, which lead to the problem of having no money to support their family and eventually commit suicide. All of these issues are derived
from the rich people. It is basically a tactic used by them, trying to get rid of the poor indirectly, in order to replace the poor with people that have more ability to work in
the future. Besides his realistic idea on survival of the fittest, I disagree with the fact where he said that his idea did not give permission to treat the weak badly. I believe
that the focus on utilitarianism in Spencer’s ideology initiated people to think that it is right for them to treat the inferior as such. This is due to the fact that the idea of
utilitarianism is based on finding best solution to maximize the benefit for all. Hence, people during that time may interpret it in the way that trying to remove the inferior
would benefit the society as a whole and therefore it is right to use power over them.
• References:
• Worksheet
• Muscato, C. (n.d.). Social Darwinism vs. Darwinism. Retrieved from Study.com: https://study.com/academy/lesson/social-darwinism-vs-darwinism.html
• Social Darwinism in the Gilded Age . (n.d.). Retrieved from Khan Academy: https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/ap-us-history/period-6/apush-gilded-age/a/social-
darwinism-in-the-gilded-age
• Date: 29th January 2018
• Questions:
• Who is Montesquieu?
• What are his political ideas?
• How should the government be organized according to Montesquieu?
• Summary:
• Montesquieu born in Medieval France (late 1600s to be exact).
• Best known for his ideas on the separation of power.
• He noticed that the society was organized into three main sections; the monarchy, the aristocrats (noble, people who work for the king), and the commons.
• Political power:
• He stated that there are two types of power that the monarchy had:
• 1. The sovereign power (the highest power/divine power): makes the final decisions
• 2. The administrative power (the office workers): separated into three parts; executive (enforcer of the laws) , legislative (creators of the
laws), judicial (judges).
• Separation of power:
• He was worried about the medieval political structure because all three types of powers remained with the monarchy.
• Sovereign power and administrative power was not separated.
• Even though the aristocrats were there to check and balance (checking the power on the monarchy) the monarchy’s exertion of such power, it was
not enough.
• He believed that the three powers should be separated, equal to each other, and able to check and balance each other.
• This is what is now called ”the separation of powers”.
• Separation of powers: either no monarch to rule all of the three sections or monarch only get to rule one (monarch ruling only one section will not
work because it will be biased for the other two sections). Thus, he didn’t want the system of monarchy to exist.
• He believed that all things were made up of laws that will remain unchanged.
• The theory of separation of powers had a lot of impact on liberal political theory and the framers of the constitution in USA (became the basis of its
constitution).
• Analysis and Opinions:
• If Montesquieu supported the idea of separating different types of power in government, what do you think is his opinion on human nature?
• If this similar to anyone else we have looked at? How so?
• Who would he disagree with? Why/how?
• How would/has his ideas affected society in your opinion?
• I think Montesquieu’s opinion on human nature is similar to Rousseau’s ideology in term of valuing the primitive over the civilized. The fact that
Montesquieu wanted to separate the administrative power into three parts displayed that he did not trust the monarch to rule by himself. At the same time,
he believed that it would be better if the powers are distributed to more people as it would lead to less corruption. As a result of not trusting human nature,
he tended to support the idea of separating different types of power in government in order to balance the power between the monarch and the citizens.
Moreover, I think his ideas were also similar to Locke’s. In Locke’s ideology, he stated that a society should consist of a limited monarchy where citizens are
allowed to overthrown the monarchy and the government if they started to rule unfairly. Hence, both of their theories are trying to eliminate the
monarchy’s power and allow the citizens to be involved in some parts of the system. With the ideas of trying to limit the monarchy’s power, I think Hobbes
would be the person who disagree with his ideas. Hobbes viewed humans as selfish creatures and therefore it would be best to implement the system of
absolute monarchy. The ideas from the two ideologists contradicted with each other as one supported the implementation of absolute monarchy, while the
other one supported limited monarchy.
• In my opinion, I think Montesquieu’s ideas would trigger some radicals to initiate ideas of collapsing the system of monarchy, Thus, it would lead to a
conflict of two groups demanding for two different systems.
• References:
• Classroom notes
• Bok, Hilary. (2003, July 18). Baron de Montesquieu, Charles-Louis de Secondat. Retrieved from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/montesquieu/
• Geib, R. (n.d.). BARON DE MONTESQUIEU. Retrieved from http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/montesquieu/montesquieu-bio.html
• Date: 12th February 2018
• Questions:
• When was John Stuart Mill born?
• What was his life like when he was young?
• Why didn’t John Stuart Mill go to school like other students? Did being home-schooled by his father cause him to have a different lifestyle from other
people?
• Does the fact that he faced nervous breakdown when he was young show any of his personality? (Analysis)
• Summary:
• Born in London, May 20th 1806
• Homeschooled by his father, James Mill, and the leading exponent of Utilitarian philosopher, Jeremy Bentham.
• Exceeded his father’s hopes of becoming a leading intellect in Utilitarianism.
• 1820: Moved to France and stayed with a family of Samuel Bentham for a year.
• 1826: Faced a nervous breakdown that is related to the physical and mental intensity of his studying.
• 1830: Met Harriet Taylor.
• They became a life-long friend and maintained a chaste relationship with each other until the death of John Taylor.
• They married each other but unfortunately, Harriet developed Tuberculosis and died after seven years of marriage.
• Harriet was one of John’s main influences in many of his works. (examples: On Liberty)
• John didn’t get to go to a proper school because he was homeschooled by his father. By being homeschooled, John had to work harder than other students.
His lifestyle was quite intensive and lack of emotional expression. While other children got to expose to new environment, John did not have a chance to
explore the pleasure of childhood at all. So, the fact that he did not get to go to school was predicted to be the reason why he faced a nervous breakdown
even he was still young.
• Analysis and Opinions:
• According to his biography, John Stuart Mill was the eldest child of his family. With the reason of being oldest, I think this was why his father wanted him to
become a leading intellect in Utilitarianism. Consequently, he was educated by his own father at home and another philosopher, Jeremy Bentham.
Furthermore, I also think that John was an ambitious person. He studied very hard throughout his childhood in which eventually caused him to experienced
a mental crisis. This was due to the intense stress if his education. Besides the hardships he faced, John still studied his father’s work and Bentham’ work in
order to reach the goal of becoming a leading intellect in Utilitarianism.
• References:
• Pettinger, Tejvan. (2013, October 6). John Stuart Mill Biography . Retrieved from Biography Online: https://www.biographyonline.net/writers/john-stuart-
mill.html
• Date: 13th February 2018
• Questions:
• What are John Stuart Mill’s ideology?
• Summary:
• Utilitarianism, Liberalism, Liberal Democracy, Sexual Equality
• Utilitarianism
• Happiness = pleasure and the absence of pain
• People desire happiness in their lives.
• Value the greatest happiness principle:
• “Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.”
• The most moral action is always the action that provides the greatest happiness to the greatest number of people
• Liberalism
• Began to distinguish old and new threats to liberty.
• The old threat to liberty:
• A monarchy (rule by one)
• An aristocracy (rule by a few)
• Found in traditional societies that rule by one (a monarchy) or a few (an aristocracy).
• The new threat to liberty:
• The democracies/ The tyranny (the majority)
• In order for the state to be fully just, it must protect and respect individuals’ rights
• The only good reason that the state could ever have to restrict an individual’s liberty is to prevent harm to other, nonconsenting persons.
• To understand Mill’s principle, it will help to distinguish 3 different principles:
• 1. The harm (to others) principle—the state is justified in restricting a person’s liberty to prevent harm to other, nonconsenting persons.
• 2. The paternalism principle—the state is justified in restricting the liberty of a competent adult, even if he threatens no harm to others,
simply to prevent him from harming himself.
• 3. The legal moralism principle—the state is justified in restricting a person’s liberty, even in cases where there is no danger of his harming
others or himself, simply to prevent him from doing something that is “intrinsically immoral” (i.e. immoral even though it harms no one).
• Analysis and Opinions:
• Based on his main five ideologies, it can be concluded that John Stuart Mill was passionate in seeking for equality and happiness for all citizens. He wanted
all classes of people to have freedom in expressing themselves and that the government should not interfere their freedom if their actions are not violating
the others. Thus, he supported the ideology of liberalism. By reading both the ideologies of utilitarianism and liberalism, I think they are kind of related to
each other. I think the fact that John Stuart Mill supported liberalism is because he valued the greatest happiness for all citizens. If the state protect and
respect individuals’ right, then all people would tend to be happy. As a result, the liberalism ideology would strengthen the utilitarianism ideology as well.
• References:
• Brink, David, "Mill's Moral and Political Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Retrieved from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/mill-moral-political/
• SparkNotes Editors. (n.d.). SparkNote on Utilitarianism. Retrieved from http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/utilitarianism/
• John Stuart Mill’s Political Philosophy . (n.d.). Retrieved from New Mexico State University: http://web.nmsu.edu/~dscoccia/101web/101Millslib.pdf
• Date: 19th February 2018
• Questions:
• What are John Stuart Mill’s ideology?
• How does John’s life background influence his ideologies?
• Summary:
• Liberal Democracy
• The best ideal form of government is representative democracy.
• Representative democracy satisfies two criteria of all good government:
• 1. Promotes the common good; the moral, intellectual, and active traits of its citizens.
• 2. Makes effective use of institutions and the resources to promote the common good.
• Believed that good government should promote the common good of its citizens.
• Political participation allows different parties to present their interest of citizens and choose with others about the public agenda. As they participate in the public debate, the
government would form a conception of a common good and at the same time learn from others.
• Sexual Equality
• Mill was born in the era where women were subordinate to men.
• Women expectations: marry, educate children, and devote themselves to their families.
• Women during that time did not get formal education, own property, vote, seek a divorce, or travel alone.
• The progress of society requires both men and women to be involved. Women should also have the right to develop their talents and pursue their desires as long as they did
not harm others.
• Personal independence is considered to be an element of happiness.
• Thus, he rejected sexual inequality and tried to endorse equal rights for both genders.
• The industrial revolution started in 1760 and ended around 1820: John was born in the period of when the revolution was about to end.
• Analysis and Opinions:
• The ideologies of liberal democracy and sexual equality also demonstrate John Stuart Mill’s main ideology of utilitarianism. For the liberal democracy, John thought that representative
democracy was the best ideal form of government. This was due to the fact that it allowed all citizens to have the right to express their opinions through their representatives in
finding the best solution for the society. By this, it helped to promote happiness for all as the government would agree on the citizens’ common good. For sexual equality, John tried to
endorse equal rights for both women and men. He rejected the inequality among the two genders. Again, this could be refer back to utilitarianism since he tried to provide the
greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.
• Due to the fact that he was born during the period of transition, John Stuart Mill had initiated many ideologies that is considering about the others’ happiness. After the industrial
revolution, people were more exposed to new technologies. They started to concern more about the development of the society and how the effects of each action could help to
elevate the quality of the country. Thus, the surroundings where John was born may have an impact to the initiation of his ideologies during that time.
• References:
• Brink, David, "Mill's Moral and Political Philosophy", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Retrieved from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/mill-moral-political/
• Shipka, T. (2009). JOHN STUART MILL ON WOMEN'S RIGHTS. Retrieved from https://wysu.org/content/commentary/john-stuart-mill-womens-rights
• Date: 20th February 2018

• Questions:
• What are John Stuart Mill’s work?
• Why are they important?

• Summary:
• The Subjection of Women (1869)
• The principle of this book: Regulates the existing social relations between the two sexes.
• The legal subordination of women to men is wrong and so it should be replaced by a principle of perfect equality, admitted no privilege to one side, nor disability on the
other.
• Utilitarianism (1861)
• Support the value of utilitarianism as a moral theory.
• Considerations on Representative Government (1861)
• He argued that representative democracy is the best form of government
• Based on the utilitarian standard: maximizing the long-run utility for the society
• On Liberty (1859)
• Justified the value of liberty through a utilitarian concept.
• Displayed the positive effects of liberty on people and the society.
• Related the idea of liberty to the ability to progress and to avoid stagnation within the country.

• Analysis and Opinions:

• There are four main books written by John Stuart Mill; The Subjection of Women, Utilitarianism, Considerations on Representative Government, and On Liberty. All of these
work explored his ideologies that he created. Despite displaying different ideologies, I think these books were a helpful tool in which helped to increase John’s popularity during
that time. More people could develop better understandings of his ideologies and so they would tend to support him.

• References:
• JOHN STUART MILL, Considerations on Representative Government. (2006). Retrieved from UC San Diego:
http://philosophyfaculty.ucsd.edu/faculty/rarneson/Courses/166JOHNSTUARTMILLConRepGov2006.pdf
• On Liberty (1859). (n.d.). Retrieved from Great Thinkers: http://thegreatthinkers.org/mill/major-works/liberty-2/
• The Subjection of Women (1869). (n.d.). Retrieved from Great Thinkers: http://thegreatthinkers.org/mill/major-works/subjection-women/
• Utilitarianism (1861). (n.d.). Retrieved from Great Thinkers: http://thegreatthinkers.org/mill/major-works/utilitarianism/
• Date: 5th March 2018
• Questions:
• Who were the main people that influenced John’s life?
• How did these people play an important role in his life?
• Summary:
• James Mill, Jeremy Bentham, and Harriet Taylor were the main people who influenced his life.
• James Mill pushed for his son to get an efficient education.
• Jeremy Bentham influenced John to develop the idea of utilitarianism.
• Harriet Taylor influenced John to develop the idea of equality for women. He was inspired to write about the disparities experienced by women after the
death of his wife.
• Analysis and Opinions:
• When John Stuart Mill was young, he was educated at home by his father and Jeremy Bentham. Since Jeremy was a Utilitarian philosopher, this may be one
of the reasons why he became interested in this ideology and continued to work on it even after the death of Jeremy.
• Harriet Taylor was also another person who played an important role in John Stuart Mill’s life. As John spent most of his time with Harriet, it is possible that
he may have seen many circumstances where women were under men’s power and did not have any right to express their opinions. Hence, Harriet was the
main influence to his work of The Subjection of Women.
• References:
• From the notes
• Date: 13th March 2018
• Questions:
• How does John Stuart Mill’s ideologies influence the society and politics?
• Were there any events that occurred due to the influence from his ideologies?
• Summary:
• Utilitarianism:
• This ideology influenced many of the Great Britain’s social reforms in the beginning of 19th century.
• It associated with many reform acts that was implemented into England such as the Factory Act of 1833, the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834, the
Prison Act of 1835, the Municipal Corporations Act of 1835, the Committee on Education in 1839,the Lunacy Act of 1845, and the Public Health Act
of 1845.
• The middle class of England moved into a position of power because of their newfound wealth during the industrial revolution. (This is related to
utilitarianism because this ideology allowed the pursuit of individual happiness and so wealth is considered to be morally good.)
• The middle class tried to enact a democratic system of government because this was the best way to maintain their wealth and power.
• Liberalism:
• In the first half of 19th century, many powerful movements occurred due to the political ideologies that derived from many philosophers.
• The book ‘On Liberty’ contributed to the protection of civil liberties and basic rights for people, including equality before the law, freedom of
assembly, speech, and press.
• The Britain’s old feudal aristocracy was removed.
• The extension of voting rights was promoted in order to allow people share power among different classes.
• The society tried to seek for more freedom from the government and the system of democracy became popular.
• Liberal Democracy:
• The implementation of democracy government system into Great Britain.
• Sexual Equality:
• To expand the meaning of liberalism, John Stuart Mill supported equality between women and men.
• ‘The Subjection of Women’ encouraged the feminists to stand up more for themselves in order to have a voice in the society.
• The book triggered the 19th century movement for women’s rights. As a consequent of the movements that occured, an act was eventually passed
to allow women to vote in the beginning of 20th century.
• Analysis and Opinions:
• Although these four ideologies were not the main reason that cause of different events, they were considered to be an indirect influence that triggered
some acts to occur. An example was seen in the 19th century movement for women’s rights. I believe that John Stuart Mill’s book called ‘The Subjection on
Women’ partly contributed to this act. This is because the details within the book talked about sexual equality in which can cause the readers, especially
women, to support equality. Eventually, women stood up for themselves in order to be involved in political decision-making.
• References:
• Roach, P. (n.d.). Bentham's Utilitarianism in Victorian England. Retrieved from
http://jeromekahn123.tripod.com/utilitarianismtheethicaltheoryforalltimes/id30.html
• Spielvogel, J. J. (2015). Western Civilization: Volume C: Since 1789. Cengage Learning. Retrieved from
https://books.google.co.th/books?id=L0EaCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT110&lpg=PT110&dq=john+stuart%27s+ideology+affect+uk+in+19th+century&source=bl&ots=K
BMzcXGfMg&sig=AjXSDpUR9nlc3yZ0SGq_Kjw6eOA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjFlsSkxenZAhVItI8KHXLHBr0Q6AEIfDAH#v=onepage&q=john%20
• The Subjection of Women by J S Mill. (n.d.). Retrieved from British Library: https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/the-subjection-of-women-by-j-s-mill
• Date: 17th March 2018
• Questions:
• What is the Factory Act of 1833 about?
• How did the idea of utilitarianism influence the Factory Act of 1833?
• Summary:
• The government passed ‘the factory act of 1833’ to improve the working conditions for children in factories, promoting the happiness for all.
• The basic act includes:
• no child workers under the age of nine.
• employers must have an age certificate for their child workers
• children of 9-13 years to work no more than nine hours a day
• children of 13-18 years to work no more than 12 hours a day
• children are not to work at night
• two hours schooling each day for children
• four factory inspectors appointed to enforce the law
• Analysis and Opinions:
• During the Victorian period, many poor children were sent into a place in which they called a workhouse. Within this place, children suffered from doing unpleasant jobs
and living in bad environment. However, the combination of Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill’s work caused the popularity of utilitarianism ideology to increase
among people in England. People tended to become more interest in valuing the happiness for all. Ultimately, the government passed the factory act of 1833 in order to
improve the working conditions for those children. Therefore, it can be concluded that the factory act of 1833 was one of the social reforms influenced from utilitarianism
ideology.
• References:
• 1833 Factory Act. (n.d.). Retrieved from The National Archives: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/1833-factory-act/