Switch to: References

Citations of:

Mill's on Liberty: A Critical Guide

(ed.)
Cambridge University Press (2009)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Political Correctness: the Twofold Protection of Liberalism.Sandra Dzenis & Filipe Nobre Faria - 2020 - Philosophia 48 (1):95-114.
    As understood today, political correctness aims at preventing social discrimination by curtailing offensive speech and behaviour towards underprivileged groups of individuals. The core proponents of political correctness often draw on post-modernism and critical theory and are notorious for their scepticism about objective truth and scientific rationality. Conversely, the critics of post-modern political correctness uphold Enlightenment liberal principles of scientific reasoning, rational truth-seeking and open discourse against claims of relativism and oppression. Yet, both the post-modern proponents and their Enlightenment liberal critics (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Value neutrality and the ranking of opportunity sets.Michael Garnett - 2016 - Economics and Philosophy 32 (1):99-119.
    I defend the idea that a liberal commitment to value neutrality is best honoured by maintaining a pure cardinality component in our rankings of opportunity or liberty sets. I consider two challenges to this idea. The first holds that cardinality rankings are unnecessary for neutrality, because what is valuable about a set of liberties from a liberal point of view is not its size but rather its variety. The second holds that pure cardinality metrics are insufficient for neutrality, because liberties (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Reformulating Mill’s Harm Principle.Ben Saunders - 2016 - Mind 125 (500):1005-1032.
    Mill’s harm principle is commonly supposed to rest on a distinction between self-regarding conduct, which is not liable to interference, and other-regarding conduct, which is. As critics have noted, this distinction is difficult to draw. Furthermore, some of Mill’s own applications of the principle, such as his forbidding of slavery contracts, do not appear to fit with it. This article proposes that the self-regarding/other-regarding distinction is not in fact fundamental to Mill’s harm principle. The sphere of protected liberty includes not (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Mill’s Inconsistent Distinctions: An Analysis of the Consistency of J‌. S‌. Mill’s Utilitarianism and Liberalism.Shirzad Peik Herfeh - 2018 - Journal of Philosophical Theological Research 20 (77):120-158.
    This paper analyzes the inconsistency of Mill’s utilitarianism in moral philosophy and his liberalism in political philosophy, the efforts of Ten and Dworkin for their consistency and the distinction that Leob and Driver use for reconciling them‌. The distinction is between decision-procedure and criterion of evaluation or the metaphysics and epistemology of right‌. In the next step, it shows a new inconsistency between Mill’s moral and political philosophy‌. It seems that Mill cannot accept the non-consequentialist ‘doing/allowing harm’ distinction in moral (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark