Talk:John Stuart Mill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Proposed article changes[edit]

A new contributor modified the lead [1]. I left a message on their talk page and reverted their edit [2], so the proposed changes can be discussed here. Steve Quinn (talk) 05:01, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

/Liberty/ Removed misplaced quotation w/ unsupportive citation[edit]

In the 'Liberty' section there was an out-of-place quotation, apparently by Mill, but not supported by the link provided as a citation. (Which was

Rather than just tag it as unsupported/dubious, I removed it because the same point about Mill - his views towards 'uncivilized' countries being exempt from law, basically - is made further down the page, where it fits in with the topic much better. It also made the section seem editorialized, squeezing in a shot at Mill which felt redundant and non-objective (especially considering the nature of the citation). (talk) 19:07, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Stuart Mill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:58, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

" Mill viewed countries such as India and China as having once been progressive, but that were now stagnant and barbarous"[edit]

Conflating stagnant with barbarous thoroughly misrepresents Mill. In On Liberty Mill certainly cites China as a civilisation that has stagnated due to restrictions on liberty by excessive control by an excessively centralised state. This is not linked to his controversial reference to 'barbarians' and should not be linked in the article.

In On Liberty Mill discusses the rights of 'barbarians' alongside those of children, who through a lack of sufficient education "must be protected against their own actions" (chapter 1) and emphasises the utilitarian proviso that "the end be their improvement". It is very far from clear that he is referring to India or China, which he recognises as civilisations in their own right.

When Mill writes about stagnation of civilisations and 'barbarians', he is discussing two entirely different issues. This section needs to be improved/amended.

MartinRDBennett (talk) 08:54, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Economic Philosophy - Socialism[edit]

I'm trying to figure out what the following statement even means. "Later he altered his views toward a more socialist bent, adding chapters to his Principles of Political Economy in defence of a socialist outlook, and defending some socialist causes.[69]" I found the source (open library. Same editor different publication date) and see "adding chapters in defense of socialism and co-operativism" and defense of the French Revolution to "Principles..." But what is 'a socialist bent' and what socialist causes? The language sounds hostile and vague. I suggest either citing the revisions directly, or changing the text to reflect the "enlarged radicalism" Ryan writes of. --Pbmax (talk) 00:54, 18 May 2019 (UTC)