Plato and John Stuart Mill: Freedom, Morality, and the Just Society

Plato and John Stuart Mill both appear to support a correspondence between the development of human intellectual capacities and the development of morality. They claim these are determining factors for the establishment of a just society.

Divergent Conceptions of Human Nature

Despite this common ground, they start from fundamentally different conceptions of human nature. Plato believes that full intellectual and moral development—the knowledge of good—is reserved for the few, specifically the philosopher-kings. His principle of functional specialization, which states that everyone should pursue that for which they are best suited, presupposes the presence or absence of different capacities in individuals from birth and commits to an educational system designed to enable their development. Mill, conversely, operates on the conviction that moral perfection is within reach of all.

Contrasting Views on Historical Progress

Plato and Mill also differ significantly in their assessment of the historical process. Plato believes that history follows a linear decline, leading inevitably towards a totalitarian and interventionist state that annuls all personal freedom. He was convinced that a just society could only be achieved through the use of censorship and 'useful lies'. Mill, deeply influenced by his democratic convictions, believes that history follows a linear upward trajectory, ultimately leading all individuals to reach their full moral development.

Hypothetical Foundations of Their Philosophies

Unfortunately, the starting points of both Plato and Mill remain hypothetical. This applies to Plato's conception, which states that moral development is restricted to an elite, as well as to Mill's view, which considers it common to all.

The Utopian Visions of Plato and Mill

Both philosophers also deserve to be labeled utopian. Plato is considered utopian for placing his complete trust in an educational system capable of forming leaders who could end social ills. John Stuart Mill, on the other hand, is seen as utopian on the grounds that moral sentiments, although not innate, are natural and human, fostering a steady increase in influences that tend to generate in each individual a feeling of unity with all others.

Towards an Open Society: A Concluding Perspective

Given the impossibility of perfect rulers who might "justify" the suppression of individual freedom, and regrettably, not sharing Mill's optimistic view of human nature and historical development, I believe that society will progress only if efforts are aimed at building an open society. As advocated by Karl Popper, such a society would avoid the concentration of power, exercise greater control among its various branches, and prioritize moral and citizenship education within a framework of respect for individual liberty.