922 JOHNSTUARTMILL
experienced both. Presumably anyone who has both wallowed in the mud and
studied philosophy would prefer the difficult but fulfilling pleasures of the latter.
Mill’s contemporary critics pointed out that there seemed to be discrepancies
between the philosophy of Utilitarianismand that of Mill’s other works that
advocated individual freedom. For example, following the greatest happiness
principle of Utilitarianism,wouldn’t it make sense for society to increase general
happiness by intruding on an individual’s liberty? Mill countered this objection
by arguing that on balance,laissez-faireindividualism will ultimately benefit
society, that the diversity of individual choices is more conducive to general hap-
piness than any socially imposed standard.
More recent critics have questioned Mill’s distinction between private and
public—for example, what you choose to do to yourself in the privacy of your
home may cost the public money if you end up in a tax-supported hospital.
Feminist critics have pointed out the potential oppression of the private/public
distinction, questioned the possibility of “perfect equality” if paternalistic struc-
tures continue, and assailed Mill’s “equal opportunity until marriage” doctrine.
But there is no question that as a reforming impulse, Mill’s beliefs—about the
rights of the individual, the rights of women and minorities, freedom from soci-
etal intrusion into personal affairs, and utility rather than tradition—have had an
enormous influence.
There are several good overviews of Mill’s life and thought, including
R.P. Anschutz,The Philosophy of John Stuart Mill(Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1953); Karl Britton,John Stuart Mill(1953; reprinted New York: Dover,
1969); Alan Ryan,J.S. Mill(London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1974); William
Thomas,Mill(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985); and Nicholas Capaldi,
John Stuart Mill: A Biography(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).
F.A. Hayek,John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor(Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1951) presents a study of Mill’s relationship with Harriet Taylor.
For a critical evaluation of his work, see H.J. McCloskey,John Stuart Mill: A
Critical Study(London: Macmillan, 1971). Guides to specific works of Mill
include John Gray and G.W. Smith, eds.,J.S. Mill’s “On Liberty” in Focus
(London: Routledge, 1991); Roger Crisp,Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to
Mill’s Utilitarianism (London: Routledge, 1997); and Henry R. West,Mill’s
Utilitarianism:A Reader’s Guide(London: Continuum, 2007). For more special-
ized studies, see Dennis F. Thompson,John Stuart Mill and Representative
Government(Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1976); Gertrude
Himmelfarb,On Liberty and Liberalism: The Case of John Stuart Mill(New
York: Knopf, 1974); Andrew Pyle’s pair of books,Liberty: Contemporary
Responses to John Stuart Milland The Subjection of Women:Contemporary
Responses to John Stuart Mill(both Bristol, UK: Thoemmes Press, 1994 and
1995); Joseph Hamburger,John Stuart Mill on Liberty and Control(Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999); Colin Heydt,Rethinking Mill’s Ethics
(London: Continuum, 2006); and John R. Fitzpatrick,John Stuart Mill’s
Political Philosophy(London: Continuum, 2006). For collections of essays, see
J.B. Schneewind, ed.,Mill: A Collection of Critical Essays(Garden City, NY:
Anchor Doubleday, 1968), J.M. Smith and E. Sosa, eds.,Mill’sUtilitarianism
