Mill and Dostoevsky on Human Nature
$19.95 Buy and instantly download this paper now
This paper presents Mill's idea of human nature and discusses the role it plays in his argument about what controls society can place over the individual. The paper then discusses how Dostoevsky would agree that human beings are inconsistent, but he would go much farther, believing that people are capable of the worst possible crimes against each other. The paper also looks at both philosophers' beliefs on legitimate and illegitimate interests.
From the Paper:"John Stuart Mill's conception of human nature in "On Liberty" is observed in his comparison of human nature to a tree. He used this analogy for two reasons. Human development is a natural kind of development, and this organic view is the opposite of the idea of human beings as machines. Mill believed that human nature is good and has a purpose. He condemns the notion from Calvinism that human nature is corrupt. He states that from a religious point of view, it is logical and "it is more consistent with that faith to believe that this Being gave all human faculties that they might be cultivated and unfolded, not rooted out and consumed" (127). Human beings are intended to grow and become all they can possibly be. The only power that can be legitimately exercised over the individual is when the rights of others are interfered with. This all sounds very simple. However, what if the government itself is corrupt and is interfering with everyone's rights? This is the problem that Dostoevsky wrote about."
Cite this Analytical Essay:
Mill and Dostoevsky on Human Nature (2003, October 01) Retrieved July 20, 2019, from https://www.academon.com/analytical-essay/mill-and-dostoevsky-on-human-nature-35321/
"Mill and Dostoevsky on Human Nature" 01 October 2003. Web. 20 July. 2019. <https://www.academon.com/analytical-essay/mill-and-dostoevsky-on-human-nature-35321/>