{"id":1292,"date":"2021-10-04T10:00:59","date_gmt":"2021-10-04T09:00:59","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/?p=1292"},"modified":"2021-10-01T14:01:06","modified_gmt":"2021-10-01T13:01:06","slug":"mill-and-ideal-theory","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/mill-and-ideal-theory\/","title":{"rendered":"Mill and Ideal Theory"},"content":{"rendered":"

John thinks that facemasks, social distancing and other public health measures are necessary to deal with the Covid 19 pandemic. He is aware that some disagree with him about this. But he hasn\u2019t spent any time looking at their reasons for disagreeing. Should he spend time engaging with them and their arguments? Or should he just ignore them? More generally, should we engage with those who hold opinions that differ from our own?<\/p>\n

Mill on Free Speech<\/em><\/p>\n

One popular argument that we should engage with opposing viewpoints comes from John Stuart Mill. Famously, Mill thought that\u2014with very few exceptions\u2014you should be free to speak your mind, no matter what you want to say. But Mill didn\u2019t just think that you should be free to say what you want. He also thought that others should engage <\/em>with what you say. As he put it:<\/p>\n

Truth has no chance but in proportion as every side of it, every opinion which embodies even a fraction of the truth, not only finds advocates, but is so advocated as to be listened to (On Liberty <\/em>p. 49).<\/p>\n

Mill reasoned as follows. Imagine someone wants to say something. If what they have to say is true, then obviously we should listen to them. But even if what they have to say is false, we still have a lot to gain from listening. There might be a grain of truth to what they have to say. Moreover, it is important to figure out why <\/em>they are wrong. Engaging with opposing viewpoints ensures that we avoid dogmatism, keep an open mind, and stay intellectually curious.<\/p>\n

Some<\/a> think that Mill was wrong about this. While we sometimes gain a lot from engaging with opposing viewpoints, whether they are true or false, it is hard to see what recommends a general policy of doing so. Mill might have been right to worry that, if we don\u2019t consider any<\/em> challenges to our views, they will become \u201cdead dogmas\u201d\u2014things we take to be true without knowing why. But why would we need to engage with anti-vaxxers to stop our view that vaccines are safe and effective becoming a dead dogma? More generally, what do we gain from engaging with people who seem to have no interest in reaching consensus, and often seem to view heated public debates as a way of pushing their political agenda?<\/p>\n

Ideal Theory<\/em><\/p>\n

If Mill was wrong, what could explain the evident appeal of his argument? We can explain its appeal as well as its limitations if we view Mill as engaging in what is called \u201cideal theory\u201d in political philosophy.<\/p>\n

Political philosophers are centrally concerned with justice. One way<\/a> of understanding ideal theory is as a way of approaching the theory of justice. On the ideal theory approach, we ask what principles would govern a just society without worrying about whether people will comply with these principles, or about what justice demands of us in situations where they don\u2019t comply. The result is a theory of what justice demands of us in ideal <\/em>situations.<\/p>\n

For its critics<\/a>, the problem with ideal theory is that it is of no use in navigating actual, non-ideal situations. These critics hold that what justice demands of you in a non-ideal situation may differ <\/em>from what it demands of you in an ideal situation. Take, for example, a pressing political question, like what we should do about the legacy of centuries of racial oppression. To answer this question, you can\u2019t ignore the fact that the principles of justice are, and always have been, routinely flouted. In an ideal situation there would be no need to pay reparations because there would be no wrong to rectify. But in our actual, non-ideal, situation there is a wrong to rectify, and the question is what we should do about it.<\/p>\n

Mill and Ideal Theory<\/em><\/p>\n

Mill wasn\u2019t offering a theory of justice, but he was interested in how we should interact with others. When we find out that someone has a different view to us, what should we do? Should we ignore them? Or should we engage? His answers to these questions make sense if we view him as doing ideal theory. If we assume that people generally comply with the principles governing social interactions (engage in good faith, back up your claims with evidence, be open minded) it is plausible that engaging with opposing viewpoints will have the benefits highlighted by Mill. If, on the other hand, we don\u2019t assume this, it is far less clear that engaging with opposing viewpoints will have these benefits. Why would engaging with someone who engages in bad faith, doesn\u2019t back up their claims with evidence, or is dogmatic, produce any tangible benefits?<\/p>\n

Ultimately, whether you agree with Mill might depend on whether you think these assumptions are true or not. If you think that, on the whole, people engage in good faith, back up their claims with evidence, and so on, then you will likely think that, on the whole, engaging with opposing viewpoints brings tangible benefits. If on the other hand you think that, at least when it comes to certain issues, people often do not engage in good faith, then you will be skeptical. This explains the appeal of Mill\u2019s argument, at least to those who think these assumptions are generally true. But it also explains the limitations. Those who think these assumptions are often false will reject it. Those who are unsure whether they are true or not will not be happy with an argument, like Mill\u2019s, that just assumes they are.<\/p>\n

Acknowledgement: Thanks to Oliver Traldi for comments on an earlier version of this piece<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Picture from: https:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/commons\/c\/c9\/Interior_of_a_London_Coffee-house%2C_17th_century.JPG<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"John thinks that facemasks, social distancing and other public health measures are necessary to deal with the Covid 19 pandemic. He is aware that some disagree with him about this. […]","protected":false},"author":1319,"featured_media":1296,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"Robin McKenna \"Mill and Ideal Theory\" on Open for Debate","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[19],"tags":[316,66],"custom_author":[317],"class_list":["post-1292","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-open-for-debate","tag-free-speech","tag-truth","custom_author-mckenna-robin"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p8KPlM-kQ","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":1026,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/responsibilities-of-the-media-are-journalists-responsible-for-publishing-the-truth\/","url_meta":{"origin":1292,"position":0},"title":"Responsibilities of the Media: Are Journalists Responsible for Publishing the Truth?","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"October 5, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"In 2016, a Daily Mail journalist who broke the scandalous story that David Cameron had placed his private parts in the mouth of a dead pig (aka \u2018Piggate\u2019), made the shocking revelation that she lacked any evidence for the sensationalist claim. By this time, the story had been reported by\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/10\/michal-lis-1mazop8Y1ss-unsplash.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/10\/michal-lis-1mazop8Y1ss-unsplash.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/10\/michal-lis-1mazop8Y1ss-unsplash.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/10\/michal-lis-1mazop8Y1ss-unsplash.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/10\/michal-lis-1mazop8Y1ss-unsplash.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2020\/10\/michal-lis-1mazop8Y1ss-unsplash.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":618,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/empathetic-understanding-in-politics\/","url_meta":{"origin":1292,"position":1},"title":"Empathetic Understanding in Politics","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"February 25, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"What is the goal of political conversation? Why should we deliberate with others about politics? Democratic deliberation is said to benefit people in many ways. For example, it has been touted as a way to produce civic engagement, increase faith in democratic institutions, encourage a willingness to compromise, and make\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/02\/jonathan-sharp-1096746-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/02\/jonathan-sharp-1096746-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/02\/jonathan-sharp-1096746-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/02\/jonathan-sharp-1096746-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/02\/jonathan-sharp-1096746-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2019\/02\/jonathan-sharp-1096746-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1853,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/how-to-take-an-extremist-seriously\/","url_meta":{"origin":1292,"position":2},"title":"How to take an extremist seriously","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"December 25, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"With the rise of polarization and support for right-wing populism, there is a call to take seriously the perspectives of those who seemingly turn away from liberal democratic ideals. But what if this involves taking persons seriously who are in the grip of QAnon, racism, climate change denialism, or The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/12\/daniel-lonn-Regf9o7r_ZM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/12\/daniel-lonn-Regf9o7r_ZM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/12\/daniel-lonn-Regf9o7r_ZM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/12\/daniel-lonn-Regf9o7r_ZM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/12\/daniel-lonn-Regf9o7r_ZM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/12\/daniel-lonn-Regf9o7r_ZM-unsplash-scaled.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":365,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/arrogance-and-the-space-of-reasons\/","url_meta":{"origin":1292,"position":3},"title":"Arrogance and the Space of Reasons","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"January 29, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 A democracy is more than a form of government; it is primarily a mode of associated living, of conjoining communicated experience. ---John Dewey[1] \u00a0 One of the truly baffling things about the Trump era in the United States is that just when you think our political life could not\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2018\/01\/Hawk.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2018\/01\/Hawk.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2018\/01\/Hawk.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1138,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/modeling-sex-as-a-joint-activity\/","url_meta":{"origin":1292,"position":4},"title":"Modeling Sex as a Joint Activity","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"February 22, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"There has been an ongoing philosophical discussion over the last three decades on consent and refusal of sex qua speech acts \u2013 that is, acts performed in the uttering of certain words (typically, \u2018yes\u2019\/\u2018no\u2019) in a sexual setting[1]. Both consent and refusal are \u2018second-turn speech acts\u2019. The thought is simple:\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2021\/02\/jason-leung-F2WX4BTIkpQ-unsplash.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2021\/02\/jason-leung-F2WX4BTIkpQ-unsplash.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2021\/02\/jason-leung-F2WX4BTIkpQ-unsplash.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2021\/02\/jason-leung-F2WX4BTIkpQ-unsplash.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2021\/02\/jason-leung-F2WX4BTIkpQ-unsplash.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2021\/02\/jason-leung-F2WX4BTIkpQ-unsplash.jpg?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":1841,"url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/we-should-complain\/","url_meta":{"origin":1292,"position":5},"title":"We Should Complain","author":"Alessandra Tanesini","date":"December 11, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"I write about complaint to reduce its stigma. I teach classic philosophical texts that argue against it, so I realize the stigma is longstanding. Complaining is soft, Aristotle says. It\u2019s undignified, Immanuel Kant adds. It should never be enjoyed, they both say. I aim to counter that. I noticed this\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Open for Debate"","block_context":{"text":"Open for Debate","link":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/category\/open-for-debate\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/12\/hands-and-head.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/12\/hands-and-head.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/12\/hands-and-head.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2023\/12\/hands-and-head.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"meta_box":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/533\/2021\/10\/Interior_of_a_London_Coffee-house_17th_century.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1292","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1319"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1292"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1292\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1295,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1292\/revisions\/1295"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1296"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1292"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1292"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1292"},{"taxonomy":"custom_author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.cardiff.ac.uk\/openfordebate\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/custom_author?post=1292"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}