In On Liberty by Mill and Plato’s The Republic, each philosopher provides differing accounts of what merits a good society. However, each looks at society from both a different moral and philosophical standpoint. Whereas Plato believes firmly in that philosophers are the best candidates to rule society , Mill argues that all citizens in a society should participate in the democratic process . Both men firmly believe in the idea of justice within society, and take similar standpoints on abolishing gender roles . For the purpose of this essay, though, I will attempt to limit myself to the sole issue of who is better fit to represent the society, and therefore in my opinion provides a better understanding of a good society. Against Plato’s model of benevolent dictatorship lead by the philosopher kings, Mill’s form of democracy where all citizens participate in popular government is, in my view, a far superior understanding of a good society. This, therefore, requires a qualification before continuing. On Liberty and The Republic both provide a vast away of other evidence towards each philosopher’s account of society, however to effectively explore this issue in the depth it requires only the above stated issue will be discussed. As with all essays of a philosophical nature, I am looking at but one smaller aspect that makes up the larger problem regarding this issue.

   To begin, a brief summarization of the most important aspects of each On Liberty and The Republic follows.

   In On Liberty, Mill is a strong proponent of the “entire aggregate of the community” being the best group to form the government. His belief of an ideal government rests in that each citizen should have the opportunity to voice his or her opinion, and have the ability to take part in the democratic process . The only policy of a truly legitimate government is one that is a completely popular one . Mill makes several statements about the prudence of Communism, and details the active character type that favors the popular government , while a passive character is more suited to Plato’s version of government, Communism . Mill also writes in some detail about the morality behind a citizen in his democracy; they will be required to “apply, at every turn, principles and maxims which have for their reason of existence the common good”. For his part, Plato creates a very opposite but equally thought out governmental structure as Mill. The Republic outlines Plato’s belief in the superior position of the philosopher kings and his be support that they should be the sole rulers of society, for they will never be undermined by the desire for liberty above and beyond what is absolutely necessary . In Part IX, Plato writes democracy to be “the most attractive of all societies”, but that the philosopher king is superior to the democratic man because the democratic man “lacks in principle” and “desires [the] necessary and unnecessary”.

   Mill clearly states in Chapter 3 of On Liberty that the best type of government is one that has the “greatest amount of beneficial consequences, immediate and prospective. A completely popular government is the only polity which can make out any claim to this character”. This is a principle of Mill’s democracy, and why it is a better understanding of a good society. Mill hopes to have society as a whole looked out for; instead of Plato’s view that the philosophers will simply dictate to people what will make them happy , Mill’s account states that regardless of a citizen’s place in society, that citizen should have as equal voice a voice as everyone else on what will make them happy. To Mill, no group of citizens, whether majority or minority, should have the right to silence another group’s views upon a subject , thus ensuring that the collective society’s needs are being met, and not just an elite group. Mill makes no distinction between any of the classes of citizen as Plato does, but instead groups them into character types: passive and active. Mill’s popular government encourages citizens to become active; these citizens who are active will create a greater society by demanding more from their government as a whole, as they do not simply accept what is going on around them . Further, intellectual superiority is the result of an active character and benefits the society further by continually moving towards a higher standard of existence . In the simplest form, active citizens are happier citizens, and happiness is the only thing of real value to Mill . Democracy as Mill sees it to be breads a higher level of individual who continually strives to better society because they have the ability to speak out and participate in their society. However, this argument does not come without criticism.

   The largest criticism of Mill’s democracy comes from Plato’s The Republic, where Plato argues that the democratic man cannot be counted on to make decisions for the greater good. To Plato, each citizen having the ability to make their opinion known through government is foolish, because the democratic man “lives from day to day… there’s no order or restraint in his life”. In Plato’s opinion, the democratic man cannot make informed choices for the betterment of society as a whole because man is by nature a selfish being. If a citizen is not selfless enough to make decisions for the benefit of everyone, society cannot function and then may further deteriorate into tyranny . Yet Mill deals with this argument fluidly when he contends that “when power resides in an exclusive class, that class will knowingly and deliberately sacrifice the other classes to themselves; it suffices that, in the absence of its natural defenders, the interest of the excluded is always in danger of being overlooked”. Mill’s defense is not that people will not sometimes act in a selfish and self-serving manner, but that the rulers Plato proposes, the philosopher kings, also have their faults. The philosopher kings have no reason not to act self-serving in their position of power, whereas all citizens in a democracy will continue to live a happier life if everyone’s needs are being met by continual participation in society.

   Both Plato and Mill look at government very differently; with Mill advocating a popular governmental system known today as democracy, and Plato believing in the superior wisdom of the philosopher kings to lead society. These two differing views create conflict over which philosopher provides the better account of a good society. This is partially a question of judgment, for each individual characterizes a good society using different criteria. However, in the case of Mill and Plato, the argument over who is best fit to represent society is a key factor in the overall determinate of the society’s value. I think that Mill successfully exhibits that by involving all citizens in a society in the governing process, it benefits society as a whole. Citizens are able to lead active lives and continually improve themselves and society, leading on both counts to a higher level of happiness, and as such achieve Mill’s desired final result of pleasure.


Works Cited

Mill, "Representative Government".
http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/aut/mill_john_stuart

Mill, "Utilitarianism".
http://etext.library.adelaide.edu.au/m/m645u/m645u.zip

Plato, "The Republic". 2nd. England: Penguin Books, 2007.