One of the fundamental issues in contemporary political and economic thought concerns the relationship and consistency between one’s social duties and personal liberties, and different schools have suggested their views on the matter. From a normative point of view, ar
More
One of the fundamental issues in contemporary political and economic thought concerns the relationship and consistency between one’s social duties and personal liberties, and different schools have suggested their views on the matter. From a normative point of view, arguments offered by modern reformist liberalism have attracted more attention in this respect. The positions of John Stuart Mill, as one of the pioneers and influential, and Amartya Kumar Sen as one of the most recent liberal reformists with respect to the idea of welfare, have been at the center of attention for several decades. Here we discuss and analyze the relationship of the concepts of individual liberty and social welfare as argued by them by employing a comparative approach, in order to provide a more elaborate picture of such a relationship. It is shown here that albeit using different methods and approaches, they share similar theoretical starting points and goals on the matter. For Mill, the liberty of the individual and society is viewed as a vital means for achieving happiness. While Mill employs a utilitarian approach to human happiness, offering a critique on utilitarianism and focusing rather on the capability approach, Sen holds that individual and social happiness would best be achieved through providing equal opportunities for free choice for the members of the society. A closer look at the arguments offered by Mill and Sen indicates that, based on the concept of the free and informed modern subject, they both believe that social and political development will improve an individual and social happiness will be better achieved by focusing on individual liberties.
Manuscript profile
