‘Lost, Enfeebled, and Deprived of Its Vital Effect’: Mill’s Exaggerated View of the Relation Between Conflict and Vitality
Author(s) -
Robert Mark Simpson
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
aristotelian society supplementary volume
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1467-8349
pISSN - 0309-7013
DOI - 10.1093/arisup/akab006
Subject(s) - vitality , argument (complex analysis) , mill , conformity , sociology , prioritization , social psychology , relation (database) , epistemology , environmental ethics , psychology , philosophy , economics , history , theology , database , computer science , biochemistry , chemistry , archaeology , management science
Mill thinks our attitudes should be held in a way that’s active and ‘alive’. He believes attitudes that lack these qualities—those held dogmatically, or in unreflective conformity—are inimical to our well-being. This claim then serves as a premiss in his argument for overarching principles of liberty. He argues that attitudinal vitality, in the relevant sense, relies upon people experiencing (and being open to) attitudinal conflict, and that this necessitates a prioritization of personal liberties. I argue that, pace Mill, contestation isn’t required for attitudinal vitality. I describe one species of attitudinal vitality that isn’t reliant upon conflict.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom