117 things from this book went into her brain. Here are the first 6.
W. L. Courtney observes that a thinker of abstract ideas gains a great deal from a partner who brings concrete examples, and the concrete examples gain their foundation from the abstract reasoning.
W. L. Courtney warns that a society which crushes individual initiative ends in a dead level of uniformity, so the variety individuals bring is needed for progress.
Mill opens On Liberty by asking how much power society may legitimately hold over the individual, a question he says shapes most practical arguments of his age.
Mill traces liberty as the early fight to limit rulers, first through guaranteed rights and later through checks that required the consent of the governed.
Mill notes that a government answerable to the majority still needs limits, since the majority may wish to oppress part of its own number.
Mill warns that social pressure can enslave the soul as surely as the state can, so protection is needed against the tyranny of prevailing opinion too.
Mill observes that custom so often passes for nature that people rarely question the rules of their own age.
Mill argues that an opinion without reasons is only one person's preference, however firmly it is held, so it is worth asking why you believe what you do.
Mill notes that most people accept others' dissent only up to the edge of what they themselves believe, so toleration is usually granted with tacit reserves.
Mill observes that people judge government interference by personal preference rather than principle, so they are often wrong in both directions.
Mill's one principle is that the only reason to force someone against their will is to prevent harm to others. Their own good is not enough, though persuasion is always fair.
Mill says that where outside control cannot reach, a person's own conscience should guard the interests of others, and judge itself all the more strictly.
Mill's list of liberty covers conscience, the freedom to shape your life to suit your own character, and the freedom to join with others for any purpose that harms no one.
Mill holds that the only freedom worth the name is pursuing your own good in your own way, so long as you do not stop others pursuing theirs.
Mill notes that societies put as much effort into forcing conformity in private life as in public life, and that the urge to impose opinions on others is held back mainly by lack of power.
Mill argues that silencing an opinion robs everyone, dissenters most of all, of the chance to swap error for truth, or to see truth sharpened by argument.
Mill argues that stopping an opinion from being heard assumes you are infallible, since you cannot be sure it is false and even a sure opinion gains from being tested.
Mill notes that people feel very sure of their opinions and rarely guard against their own fallibility, treating the views of their own circle as if they were the whole world's.
Mill concedes that we must act on our best opinions even though we may be wrong, but says presuming a view true is different from refusing to let it be tested.
Mill holds that human judgment is valuable because errors can be corrected, and it stays reliable only while the means of correction, discussion and experience, are kept at hand.
Mill says a wise person builds judgment by hearing every side, seeking out objections rather than avoiding them, and only then has a right to trust their own view.
Mill argues that the beliefs we have most reason to trust are the ones that keep an open invitation to the world to prove them wrong.
Mill says that to call a view certain while silencing anyone who would deny it is to judge certainty without hearing the other side.
Mill notes that restricting opinions because they seem useless or harmful still assumes infallibility, since usefulness is itself a matter of opinion that needs testing.
Mill's test is not how sure we feel but whether we decide a question for others without letting them hear what can be said on the other side.
Mill reminds us that Socrates was condemned by his own city, and that the people a generation silences are often the ones later honoured most.
Mill argues that the people who once condemned great reformers were usually as sincere and respectable as people today, so we should doubt the certainties of our own era.
Mill notes that even a wise and gentle ruler can wrongly suppress new ideas, so being the most enlightened person around is no guarantee of being right.
Mill says that someone who reveals a truth the world had got wrong performs a great service, and treating them harshly shows how little the world values that service.
Mill warns that truth does not win on its own strength, since suppression often works, but a true idea tends to be rediscovered until one rediscovery finally survives.
Mill says social stigma, more than the law, is what really silences unpopular views, and that it works just as well.
Mill warns that when people keep their real convictions private and say only what the public wants, a society loses its moral courage and its thinkers grow timid.
Mill argues that truth gains more from the errors of someone who thinks for themselves than from the right opinions of people who never think at all.
Mill notes that a people only becomes intellectually alive when the big questions are open to debate, as Europe did after the Reformation and in the eighteenth century.
Mill says a true opinion that is never openly discussed becomes a dead dogma rather than a living truth, and so it needs fearless testing.
Mill warns that a truth held without knowing its grounds is just one more superstition, clinging to the words that state it.
Mill points out that mathematics has arguments on one side only, while most real questions need a balance between two sets of reasons, so you must learn both sides to know your view.
Mill, citing Cicero, says that if you know only your own side of a question you have no real ground to prefer it, so you must study the opposing case as hard as your own.
Mill says you only truly know your view once you can state the strongest case against it, so imagine the sharpest opponent and give them their best arguments.
Mill warns that without open argument the words of a belief lose their meaning, leaving phrases learned by rote instead of a living understanding.
Mill notes that a belief loses its living power once people inherit it rather than choose it, and that it is most vivid while it is still fighting for its place.
Mill warns that a belief handed down and accepted passively goes dead, and can end up guarding the mind against any fresh conviction.
Mill notes that many people profess high principles but guide their conduct by the customs of their group, so the principles never shape what they actually do.
Mill observes that teachers and learners go to sleep at their post once there is no opponent, so a belief stays most alive while it is actively defended.
Mill observes that proverbs we hear all our lives only come alive once experience teaches us their meaning, and that open argument would bring that understanding sooner.
Mill notes that when a truth is universally accepted we lose the benefit of defending it against opponents, so teachers should look for a way to keep its difficulties alive for learners.
Mill praises Socratic questioning, which shows people that they do not yet understand the beliefs they have simply adopted, so they can build a firm belief of their own.
Mill says criticism that exposes weak points is a route to real knowledge, so when someone challenges your view, listen and be grateful they have done the hard work for you.
Mill observes that popular opinions are usually part of the truth but rarely the whole of it, so a dissenter's view often holds the missing piece and is worth hearing.
Mill argues that on the great questions of practical life, truth lies in reconciling opposites, so the side in the minority deserves a fair hearing as the voice of what is neglected.
Mill argues that no single body of moral teaching holds the whole truth, so a part of the truth should not be mistaken for the whole, and good moral thinking draws on several sources.
Mill argues that the real evil is not the clash between parts of the truth but the quiet suppression of one side, so truth only has a chance when every side is argued and listened to.
Mill sums up four reasons for free opinion: a silenced view may be true, even an error may hold part of the truth, a view not contested becomes a prejudice, and its meaning fades.
Mill notes that a telling attack always feels intemperate to the person it lands on, so calls for temperate debate are hard to police fairly.
Mill argues that name-calling by people who hold the prevailing view deters others from speaking, so restraint matters most on that side.
Mill's rule for public debate is to judge people by their candour rather than by the side they take, and to credit opponents for stating the other view fairly.
In On Liberty, Mill warned that true toleration means freedom for everyone who holds their beliefs in good faith, not only for those who share one creed.
John Stuart Mill held that people should be free to act on their own opinions in their own lives, so long as they do not harm others. Only conduct that hurts others can rightly be controlled.
John Stuart Mill argued that since no one is infallible and most truths are only half-truths, different ways of living are worth trying, so each can be proved in practice.
Mill held that the free development of individuality is a necessary part of well-being and progress, though people rarely value it for its own sake.
