Submitted by Automa??o e Estat?stica (sst@bczm.ufrn.br) on 2016-05-03T23:56:28Z No. of bitstreams: 1 RafaelLucasDeLima_TESE.pdf: 1734239 bytes, checksum: 18bd8393a7c921f74016417817f3e727 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Arlan Eloi Leite Silva (eloihistoriador@yahoo.com.br) on 2016-05-05T23:20:34Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 RafaelLucasDeLima_TESE.pdf: 1734239 bytes, checksum: 18bd8393a7c921f74016417817f3e727 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-05-05T23:20:34Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 RafaelLucasDeLima_TESE.pdf: 1734239 bytes, checksum: 18bd8393a7c921f74016417817f3e727 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-04-17 / O desenvolvimento do indiv?duo humano foi objeto de investiga??o de muitos pensadores ao longo da hist?ria da filosofia. Os sentidos que esse desenvolvimento adquiriu, no entanto, foram muito variados, abrangendo aspectos morais, pol?ticos, epistemol?gicos, est?ticos, econ?micos, e mesmo religiosos. O objetivo desta tese ? investigar o sentido que esse desenvolvimento adquiriu para o fil?sofo utilitarista John Stuart Mill, partindo, para isso, de sua concep??o de individualidade. / The development of a human individual was a matter of investigation for many thinkers through the history of philosophy. The meanings that this development has taken were, nevertheless, very diversified, involving moral, political, epistemological, aesthetical and even religious aspects. The main agents in this process of development of human individuality are, on the one hand, each individual, who has to strive to improve himself the most, creating and resorting to the means available to that; on the other hand, the fomentalist State also have to take his part in this process, given that such a State has a direct interest in the development of his own citizens; it has to act in such a way that it can foment new and enhance the old existing means that can be used to accomplish the task of developing the human individuality. The goal of this thesis is to investigate the meaning that such development has acquired for the utilitarian philosopher John Stuart Mill, from his conception of individuality.

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / A vida impõe decisões às pessoas o tempo todo, e as pessoas as tomam de acordo com seus valores considerando as particularidades de cada situação. Valo-res são quaisquer aspectos da decisão que sejam considerados desejáveis, indese-jáveis, relevantes e importantes como: ser preferido, desejável, agradável, promis-sor, seguro, emocionante, justo, bom, correto, fácil, incerto, etc. Com base nestes valores, entendemos que o fundamento último do utilitarismo é o princípio da maximização da felicidade. Segundo esta concepção, uma ação é considerada correta, logo válida, se ela promover maior felicidade dos implicados. A felicidade é entendida como o alcance do prazer e do bem-estar. Nesta corrente encontramos uma perspectiva eudamonista e hedonista, uma vez que tem em vista como objectivo final a felicidade que consiste no prazer. Qualquer utilitarista tem de se importar, sobretudo com a promoção da felicidade geral. A partir de Mill, a moralidade passa a ser realização de cada ser humano neste mundo, aqui e agora. O princípio de utilidade exige que cada um de nós faça o que for necessário e estiver ao seu alcançe para promover a felicidade e evitar a dor. Ao analisarmos as consequências previsíveis de uma ação, temos que considerar não apenas a quantidade, mas a qualidade de prazer que dela possa resultar. Para os utilitaristas o que importa são as consequências das ações, elas devem visar ao prazer, e somente isso permite avaliar se uma ação é correta ou não, logo é uma perspectiva consequencialista. O que importa são as consequências e não os motivos das nossas ações, desde que isso promova a felicidade ao maior número de pessoas possível. Mas, o ato só é permissível se, e apenas se, maximiza imparcialmente o bem. A filosofia Utilitarista costuma dividir seus leitores. É exaltada por alguns, que defendem o mérito de ser um ponto de vista que oferece melhores subsídios para melhor lidarmos com as questões éticas que realmente importam e estão associadas às condições que tornam possível uma vida feliz e se possível, isenta de sofrimentos. Por outro lado, há aqueles que apontam para o perigo de uma filosofia que estima a qualidade moral de ações levando em consideração apenas as suas consequências. Esta corrente não é uma escola filosófica, uma vez que se trata de uma filosofia que constantemente se reinventa e se adapta a fim de ir sempre ao encontro de novos desafios que uma ética não pode deixar de enfrentar. / Life requires decisions to people all the time and people take them according to their values, considering the particularities of each situation. Values are any aspects of the decision which are considered desirable, undesirable, relevant and important, as being preferred, desirable, pleasant, promising, safe, exciting, fair, good, correct, easy, uncertain, etc. Based on these values, we understand that the ultimate foundation of utilitarianism is the principle of utility. According to this concept, an action is considered correct, thus, valid, if it promotes greater happiness of those involved. Happiness, in turn, is understood as the achievement of pleasure and welfare. In this current we find a eudemonistic and hedonistic perspective, as it has as the ultimate goal happiness consisting in pleasure. Any utilitarian has to care mostly with the promotion of general happiness. From Mill, morality becomes the achievement of every human being in this world, here and now. The principle of utility requires that each one of us do whatever is necessary, and within our rich, to promote happiness and avoid pain. By analyzing the predictable consequences of an action, we must consider not only the quantity, but the quality of pleasure resulting from them. To utilitarians what really matters are the consequences of actions, as they should aim pleasure. Only this allows us to assess whether an action is right or not, leading to the idea of a consequentialist perspective. What matters are the consequences and not the reasons of our actions, as long as it promotes happiness to as many people as possible. However, the act is permissible only if, and only if, it impartially maximizes the good. The Utilitarian philosophy usually divides its readers. It is extolled by some, who defend the merit of its being a viewpoint that offers better benefits, so that important ethical issues the ones associated with conditions that can make life happier and free from suffering can be more easily dealt with. On the other hand, there are those that points to the danger of a philosophy that estimates the moral quality of actions, taking into account only its consequences. This current is not a philosophical school, since it is a philosophy that constantly reinvents itself and adapts, so that it can always meet new challenges that ethics cannot avoid facing.

Dissertação (mestrado)—Universidade de Brasília, Instituto de Ciências Humanas, Departamento de Filosofia, 2010. / Submitted by Jaqueline Ferreira de Souza (jaquefs.braz@gmail.com) on 2011-02-24T11:50:59Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2010_EmmanuelIfekaNwora.pdf: 433076 bytes, checksum: eca7a675e61680d6374d35f219019bd4 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Marília Freitas(marilia@bce.unb.br) on 2011-03-31T12:14:22Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2010_EmmanuelIfekaNwora.pdf: 433076 bytes, checksum: eca7a675e61680d6374d35f219019bd4 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2011-03-31T12:14:22Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2010_EmmanuelIfekaNwora.pdf: 433076 bytes, checksum: eca7a675e61680d6374d35f219019bd4 (MD5) / John Stuart Mill se posiciona contra o conformismo moral e o despotismo político. Ele defende a espontaneidade, a individualidade, a diversidade e o pluralismo cultural e social como elementos básicos para o desenvolvimento pessoal do indivíduo e para o progresso social. Em base a princípios utilitaristas, ele afirma que há um limite para a interferência legítima da autoridade civil e da opinião pública na vida particular do indivíduo. Naquilo que diz respeito apenas a ele mesmo, o indivíduo é soberano e sua liberdade, absoluta. A sociedade e a autoridade civil não podem interferir no domínio particular do indivíduo salvo em caso de dano aos outros membros da sociedade. Essa postura leva muitos autores a enxergar nele um defensor da liberdade negativa apenas. No entanto, meu argumento é que há suficientes provas indutivas e textuais em Mill para considerá-lo também um defensor da liberdade positiva. __________________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT / John Stuart Mill stands against moral conformism and political despotism. He defends spontaneity, individuality, diversity, and cultural pluralism as basic elements for personal development of the individual and for social progress. Based on utilitarian principles, he affirms that there is a limit to legitimate interference of civil authority and public opinion in the private life of the individual. The individual is sovereign and his liberty is absolute in what concerns him alone. Society and civil authority may not interfere in the private domain of the individual except in case of harm to other members of society. This position makes so many authors see in him a defender of negative liberty only. However, my argument is that there are sufficient inductive and textual proofs in Mill to consider him a defender of positive liberty as well.

Orientador: João Carlos Kfouri Quartim de Moraes / Tese (doutorado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciencias Humanas / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-10T12:28:15Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Simoes_MauroCardoso_D.pdf: 689417 bytes, checksum: b3eac16f2f065eed0bd6cf25d6ef5165 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2007 / Resumo: John Stuart Mill é considerado neste trabalho um dos representantes mais significativos do utilitarismo. Suas idéias são tomadas como as mais inspiradoras e aquelas que contribuíram decisivamente para a construção de um utilitarismo matizado, qualificado e mesmo inovador. Mill, ao contrário do que alegam seus detratores, possuía, desde sua crise mental, uma capacidade extraordinária para abrigar as mais diversas tendências filosóficas de seu tempo, o que motivou grande parte das críticas que lhe foram dirigidas. Duas destas críticas a que se reporta neste trabalho é aquela empreendida por Henry John McCloskey e Gertrud Himmelfarb, sendo que esta entende ser Mill um porta-voz das idéias de seu pai, James Mill e de sua esposa Harriet Taylor, e que por ter abrigado idéias tão díspares em seu pensamento, teria acabado por se tornar ambíguo e defensor de teses contraditórias. Mais do que refutar tal interpretação analisa-se, aqui, as perspectivas que mobilizaram Mill, particularmente nas duas obras que circunscrevemos como exigência para o tratamento das reflexões do filósofo britânico: On Liberty e Utilitarianism. Considera-se, aqui, que Mill possui uma coerência nos temas a que se refere constantemente, quais sejam, a preocupação com o ideário utilitarista e com sua defesa da liberdade civil e dos direitos entendidos como prima facie. Esta tese analisa, ainda, as principais contribuições dadas por Mill e defendidas em On Liberty. Tal defesa ressalta a preocupação com as noções de autonomia, auto-desenvolvimento e liberdade positiva, posicionando-se por uma leitura de Mill como um pensador que rechaça o paternalismo e declara sua mais controversa e ao mesmo tempo frágil intenção, a fundamentação do liberalismo sobre bases utilitaristas / Abstract: John Stuart Mill is considered in this work one of the most significant representatives of the utilitarianism. His ideas are taken as the most inspiring and those that had definitely contributed for the construction of a complex, qualified and even innovative utilitarianism. Mill, in contrast with what his detractors allege, possessed, since his mental crisis, an extraordinary capacity to shelter the most diverse philosophical trends of his time, what has motivated most of the critics against him. Two of the critics that he reports to in this work is the undertaken by Henry John McCloskey and Gertrud Himmelfarb, which seems to show Mill as the spokesman of the ideas of his father, James Mill, and of his wife Harriet Taylor, and for establishing such different ideas in his thought, he would end up becoming ambiguous and a defender of contradictory theses. More than refuting such interpretation it can be analyzed, here, the perspectives that had mobilized Mill, particularly in the two works that we circumscribe as requirement for treating the reflections of the British philosopher: On Liberty and Utilitarianism. It is considered, here, that Mill possesses a harmony in the subjects he constantly refers as, whatever they are, the concern with the utilitarian idealism and with his defense of the civil freedom and of the known as prima facie. This thesis analyzes, still, the main contributions provided by Mill and defended in On Liberty. Such defense enhances the concern with the notions of autonomy, self-development and positive liberty, locating itself for a reading of Mill as of a thinker who rejects paternalism and declares its most controversial and at the same time fragile intention, the establishment of liberalism over utilitarian basis / Doutorado / Filosofia Politica / Doutor em Filosofia

Recent history has abundantly justified J. S. Mlll's theory that the power of soclety over the indivldual is llkely to increase without limlt If lt was not prevented. One of the most obvlous phenomena of our times has been the rise of the so-called totalltarlan systems of government; states that treat the lndlvldual as a being wlth no other end but the servlce of the state and which are prepared to use the advanced technlques which modern scientific research has made available to them to mould the individual as the perfect tool of the system.

This thesis seeks to establish a significant commonality and compatibility between the principles underpinning the political and social philosophies of GWF Hegel and John Stuart Mill. The role of the individual and the social order in both their theories is discussed and assessed separately and in turn in reference to their respective seminal works on the proper structure, principles and function of modern political infrastructure. Through an interpretation of the fundamental tenets and goals of their theories of the social order I argue for a coherent modern reconstruction of their doctrines, within which I locate parallels and contrasts as they apply. Both theorists as ultimately put forward similar arguments for freedom as an intersubjectively·developed capacity, the ideal social order as rational framework for the management of ethical and political engagement, linked to a social holism that ties individual and social progress inextricably. A respect for individual particularity of perspective and practice is integral both of their social frameworks, but that such a space must be harmonised within a rational political community worthy of individual obligation. Finally their social and political theories can be understood as complementary, each providing insights which the other lacks. Mill suffers from an insufficient regard for the social basis of identity and interconnected nature of the modern institutional framework, while Hegel displays an insufficient regard for Mill's caveats concerning the repressive potential of institutional structures and the dangers of overly empowered bureaucracies. In conclusion key elements of the two theorists' projects stand as separate but not in any way fundamentally opposed to each other. This points to the possibility of a via media between a politics of individualism and a politics of community, suggesting strong potential for reconciliation between liberal and communitarian perspectives.

This paper is a case study on Bradley E. Manning, famous for leaking classified intelligence to media, or in the charge sheet’s words: “knowingly give intelligence to the enemy, through indirect means.” My opinion is that this sort of dilemma is a question of values, how you view the world and, most important of all, human rights and the philosophy of rights. Therefore I decided to sort out the arguments regarding the issue of freedom of speech versus the state’s need for protection. To do this I performed a pro et contra analysis from John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty and Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan, this building my theory on which I lean my other work upon. Furthermore, I performed a case study on Manning where I compared the charges and the defense with the arguments of Mill and Hobbes. Ergo: I applied my theory on an existing conflict between freedom of speech and the state’s need for protection to see which arguments that are used in the charge against Manning and if one could derive this from the argumentation analysis consistent of Mill and Hobbes.   Words: 11474

As one of the most well-known figures of the nineteenth century, John Stuart Mill was depicted extensively in journalism, pictures, life-writing and fiction. This thesis draws on a selection from these diverse and underexplored sources to offer a new perspective on Mill’s presence in Victorian cultural and emotional life. It shows how Mill figured in fierce debates about science and culture in the mid- to late-nineteenth century, and how ideas of Mill’s ‘femininity’ were used to both attack and commend him philosophically, politically and personally. Mill’s ‘Saint of Rationalism’ label continues to belie the extent to which he was associated with ideas of passion, sensitivity, tenderness, feeling, and emotion in the nineteenth century. This project explores how such terms were invoked in relation to Mill as a philosopher and politician, but also how they related to readers’ encounters with his works. More than any previous study, this thesis pays close attention to the interaction between verbal and visual depictions, and considers official images and caricatures of Mill alongside written accounts. Though much scholarship emphasises that Mill’s reputation went into decline after his death in 1873 (to be recovered in the late twentieth century), this thesis demonstrates the vitality and diversity of literary engagements with Mill in the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries. It offers case studies of three authors – Thomas Hardy, Mona Caird and Olive Schreiner – and reads both the form and content of their fiction as involved in recognisably Millian experiments in living. Exploring the Millian concepts that figure in novels by Hardy, Caird and Schreiner not only expands the sense of the philosophical context to their writings, but underscores the continued relevance of Mill to discussions of self-development and education, free discussion and intellectual independence. Finally, this thesis suggests ways in which work on representations of Mill could be developed to gain further insight into the cultural history of the philosopher, into interactions between philosophy and literature, and into the nineteenth-century definitions of liberal culture that inform twenty-first century debates.

Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades / Tesis para optar al grado de Magíster en Filosofía mención Axiología y Filosofía Política / El presente trabajo, representa un estudio sobre la idea de opinión pública en la propuesta política de Mill bajo una mirada que gira en torno a sus alcances y aplicaciones en el sistema político liberal asociado al capitalismo. El objetivo central de esta propuesta, está fijado en la revisión del rol que el filósofo le da a la prensa, proponiéndola como instrumento político que permite la expresión del colectivo de opiniones. El carácter instrumental que toma la prensa viene a determinar que, a través de ésta, tenemos noticia de sucesos relevantes a la hora de tomar decisiones políticas en la actividad ciudadana por lo que, se transforma en la herramienta de sostenimiento del debate político. Sin embargo, quienes manejen los medios de comunicación de masa, manejan la distribución de una u otra opinión; por lo tanto, manejan la posibilidad del asumir una u otra preferencia ya sea potenciando una idea u omitiendo otra. Simultáneamente, se produce el detrimento de la división entre la esfera pública y la esfera privada generando una frontera nebulosa donde lo público es manejado desde lo privado con la creciente evaporación de espacios de deliberación y de acción intercomunicativa reemplazados por un espacio virtual. De esta manera, se verá como los medios de comunicación de masa se transforman en el lugar donde se aloja el poder y que incluso, podrían reconocerse como un mecanismo de control o aparato ideológico y, además, vienen a constituir el elemento de pérdida de la actividad de la polis.

The purpose of this essay is to analyze and determine if the National Security Law implemented in Hong Kong is in contradiction or in accordances with John Stuart Mill’s four grounds of free speech. What contradictions or accordances can be found between the law and the four grounds of free speech? The theoretical background for this essay consists of information about the relation between Hong Kong and China, the law and its contents, definition of the four grounds of free speech and the protection of free speech in other forms. A qualitative content analysis was done with the use of a systemic analysis to achieve the purpose. The findings where categorized according to the four grounds of free speech. The essay concludes that all the four grounds are contested. This is due to the law granting the government of Hong Kong and its various bodies additional power to control and supervise what is spoken and written. One instance of accordance was found between the law and the four grounds. Furthermore, the right to freedom of speech will diminish on various levels across the region of Hong Kong and the criminalization of an opinion has effectively been instated by the law.