Early life and career
The eldest son of the British historian, economist, and
philosopher James Mill, he was born in his father's house in Pentonville, London. He was educated exclusively by his father, who was
a strict disciplinarian. By his eighth year he had read in the original Greek Aesop's Fables, Xenophon's Anabasis,
and the whole of the historian Herodotus. He was acquainted with the satirist Lucian, the historian of philosophy Diogenes
Laërtius, the Athenian writer and educational theorist Isocrates, and six dialogues of Plato. He had also read a great deal
of history in English. At the age of eight he started Latin, the geometry of Euclid, and algebra and began to teach the younger children of the family. His main reading was still history, but
he went through all the Latin and Greek authors commonly read in the schools and universities and, by the age of 10 could
read Plato and the Athenian statesman Demosthenes with ease. About the age of 12, he began a thorough study of Scholastic
logic, at the same time reading Aristotle's logical treatises in the original. In the following year he was introduced to
political economy and studied the work of the Scottish political economist and philosopher Adam Smith and that of the English
economist David Ricardo.
While the training the younger Mill received
has aroused amazement and criticism, its most important aspect was the close association it fostered with the strenuous character
and vigorous intellect of his father. From his earliest days he spent much time in his father's study and habitually accompanied
him on his walks. He thus inevitably acquired many of his father's speculative opinions and his father's way of defending
them. But he did not receive the impress passively and mechanically. The duty of collecting and weighing evidence for himself
was at every turn impressed upon the boy. His childhood was not unhappy, but it was a strain on his constitution and he suffered
from the lack of natural, unforced development.
From May 1820 until July 1821, Mill was
in France with the family of Sir Samuel Bentham, brother of Jeremy Bentham, the English Utilitarian philosopher, economist, and theoretical jurist. Copious extracts from
a diary kept at this time show how methodically he read and wrote, studied chemistry and botany, tackled advanced mathematical
problems, and made notes on the scenery and the people and customs of the country. He also gained a thorough acquaintance
with the French language. On his return in 1821 he added to his work the study of psychology and of Roman law, which he read
with John Austin, his father having half decided on the bar as the best profession open to him. This intention, however, was
abandoned, and in 1823, when he had just completed his 17th year, he entered the examiner's office of the India House. After
a short probation he was promoted in 1828 to assistant examiner. For 20 years, from 1836 (when his father died) to 1856, Mill
had charge of the British East India Company's relations with the Indian states, and in 1856 he became chief of the examiner's
In 1822 Mill had read P.-E.-L. Dumont's exposition of Bentham's
doctrines in the Traités de
Législation, which made a lasting impression upon him. The impression was confirmed by the study of the English psychologists
and also of two 18th-century French philosophers—Étienne Bonnot de Condillac, who was also a psychologist, and Claude-Adrien Helvétius, who was noted for his emphasis on physical sensations. Soon after, in 1822–23,
Mill established among a few friends the Utilitarian Society, taking
the word, as he tells us, from Annals of the Parish, a novel of Scottish country
life by John Galt.
Two newspapers welcomed his contributions—The
Traveller, edited by a friend of Bentham's, and The Morning Chronicle, edited by his father's friend John Black.
One of his first efforts was a solid argument for freedom of discussion in a series of letters to the Chronicle on
the prosecution of Richard Carlile, a 19th-century English radical and freethinker. Mill seized every chance
for exposing departures from sound principle in Parliament and courts of justice. Another outlet was opened up for him (April
1824) with the founding of the Westminster Review, which was the organ of the
philosophical radicals. In 1825 he began work on an edition of Bentham's Rationale of Judicial Evidence (5 vol., 1827).
He took part eagerly in discussions with the many men of distinction who came to his father's house and engaged in set discussions
at a reading society formed at the home of English historian George Grote in 1825 and in debates at the London Debating Society,
formed in the same year.
Public life and writing
tells how in 1826 Mill's enthusiasm was checked by a misgiving as to the value of the ends that he had set before him. At
the London Debating
Society, where he first measured his strength in public conflict, he found himself looked upon with curiosity as a precocious
phenomenon, a “made man,” an intellectual machine set to grind certain tunes. The elder Mill, like Plato, would
have put poets under ban as enemies of truth; he subordinated private to public affections; and Landor's maxims of “few
acquaintances, fewer friends, no familiarities” had his cordial approval. The younger Mill now felt himself forced to
abandon these doctrines. Too much in awe of his father to make him a confidant, he wrestled with his doubts in gloomy solitude.
He emerged from the struggle with a more catholic view of human happiness, a delight in poetry for its own sake, a more placable
attitude in controversy, a hatred of sectarianism, and an ambition no less noble and disinterested but moderated to practical
possibilities. Gradually, the debates in the Debating Society attracted men with whom contact was invigorating and inspiring.
Mill ceased to attend the society in 1829, but he carried away from it the conviction that a true system of political philosophy
much more complex and many-sided than he had previously had any idea of, and that its office was to supply, not a set of model
institutions but principles from which the institutions suitable to any given circumstances might be deduced.
Mill's letters in The Examiner in
the autumn of 1830, after a visit to Paris, where he made the acquaintance of the younger liberals, may be taken as marking his return to hopeful activity;
and a series of articles on “The Spirit of the Age” appeared in the same paper in 1831. During the years 1832
and 1833 he contributed many essays to Tait's Magazine, The Jurist, and The Monthly Repository. In 1835 Sir
William Molesworth founded The London Review, with Mill as editor. It was amalgamated with The Westminster (as
The London and Westminster Review) in 1836, and Mill continued as editor (latterly as proprietor, also) until 1840.
In and after 1840 he published several important articles in The Edinburgh Review. Some of the essays written for these
journals were reprinted in the first two volumes (1859) of Mill's Dissertations and Discussions and give evidence of the increasing
width of his interests. Among the more important are “Thoughts on Poetry and Its Varieties” (1833), “Writings
of Alfred de Vigny” (1838), “Bentham” (1838), “Coleridge” (1840), “M. De Tocqueville on
Democracy in America” (1840), “Michelet's History of France” (1844), and “Guizot's Essays and Lectures
on History” (1845). The twin essays on Bentham and Coleridge show Mill's powers at their splendid best and indicate very clearly
the new spirit that he tried to breathe into English radicalism.
During these years Mill also wrote his great systematic
works on logic and on political economy. His reawakened enthusiasm for humanity had taken
shape as an aspiration to supply an unimpeachable method of proof for conclusions in moral and social science; the French
positivist philosopher Auguste Comte had some influence here, but the main inspiration undoubtedly came from the English scientist
and mathematician Sir Isaac Newton, whose physics had already been accepted as a model of scientific exposition
by such earlier British philosophers as John Locke, David Hume, Jeremy Bentham, and James Mill. But he was determined that
the new logic should not simply oppose the old logic. In his Westminster review (of 1828) of Richard Whately's Elements of Logic, he was already defending the syllogism against
the Scottish philosophers who had talked of superseding it by a supposed system of inductive logic. He required his inductive
logic to “supplement and not supersede.” For several years he searched in vain for the means of concatenation.
Finally, in 1837, on reading William Whewell's Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences
and rereading John F.W. Herschel's Preliminary Discourse on the Study of
Natural Philosophy, Mill at last saw his way clear both to formulating the methods of scientific investigation and to
joining the new logic onto the old as a supplement. A System of Logic, in two volumes, was published in 1843 (3rd–8th
editions, introducing many changes, 1851–72). Book VI is his valiant attempt to formulate a logic of the human sciences—including
history, psychology, and sociology—based on causal explanation conceived in Humean terms, a formulation that has lately
come in for radical criticism.
Mill distinguished three stages in his development
as a political economist. In 1844 he published the Essays on Some
Unsettled Questions of Political Economy, which he had written several years earlier, and four out of five of these essays
are solutions of perplexing technical problems—the distribution of the gains of international commerce, the influence
of consumption on production, the definition of productive and unproductive labour, and the precise relations between profits
and wages. Here for the most part Mill appears as the disciple of David Ricardo, striving after more precise statements and reaching forward to further consequences.
In his second stage, originality and independence become more conspicuous as he struggles toward the standpoint from which
he wrote his Principles of Political
Economy. This was published in 1848
(2 vol.; 2nd and 3rd eds., with significant differences, 1849, 1852), and, at about the same time, Mill was advocating the
creation of peasant proprietorships as a remedy for the distresses and disorder in Ireland. Thereafter, he made a more thorough study of Socialist writers. He was convinced that the social question
was as important as the political question. He declined to accept property, devised originally to secure peace in a primitive
society, as necessarily sacred in its existing developments in a quite different stage of society. He separated questions
of production and distribution and could not rest satisfied with the distribution that condemned the labouring classes to
a cramped and wretched existence, in many cases to starvation. He did not come to a Socialist solution, but he had the great
merit of having considered afresh the foundations of society. This he called his third stage as a political economist, and
he says that he was helped toward it by Mrs. Taylor (Harriet Hardy), who became his wife in 1851.
It is generally supposed that Mill writes with a lover's
extravagance about Harriet's powers. He expressly says, indeed, that he owed none of his technical doctrine to her, that she
influenced only his ideals of life for the individual and for society, and that the only work directly inspired by her is
the essay on the “Enfranchisement of
Women” (Dissertations, vol. 2). Nevertheless, Mill's relations with her have always been something of a puzzle.
During the seven years of his marriage Mill became
increasingly absorbed in the work of the British East India Company and in consequence published less than at any other period of his life. In
1856 he became head of the examiner's office in the India House, and for two years, till the dissolution of the company in
1858, his official work kept him fully occupied. It fell to him as head of the office to write the defense of the company's
government of India when the transfer of its powers was proposed.
Mill opposed the transfer, and the documents in which he defended the company's administration are models of trenchant and
dignified pleading. On the dissolution of the company, Mill was offered a seat in the new council but declined it and retired
with a pension of £1,500. His retirement from official life was followed almost immediately by his wife's death at Avignon, France. He spent most of the rest of his life at a villa at Saint-Véran, near Avignon, returning to his house at Blackheath only for a short period in each year.
The later years
Mill sought relief by publishing a series of books on
ethics and politics that he had meditated upon and partly written in collaboration with his wife. The essay On Liberty appeared in 1859 with a touching
dedication to her and the Thoughts on
Parliamentary Reform in the same year. In his Considerations
on Representative Government (1861) he systematized opinions
already put forward in many casual articles and essays. It has been remarked how Mill combined enthusiasm for democratic government
with pessimism as to what democracy was likely to do; practically every discussion in these books exemplifies this. His Utilitarianism (in Fraser's Magazine,
1861; separate publication, 1863) was a closely reasoned attempt to answer objections to his ethical theory and to remove
misconceptions about it. He was especially anxious to make it clear that he included in “utility” the pleasures
of the imagination and the gratification of the higher emotions; and to make a place in his system for settled rules of conduct.
Mill also began to write again on the wider philosophical
questions that had occupied him in the Logic. In 1865 he published both his Examination of
Sir William Hamilton's Philosophy and his Auguste Comte
and Positivism, but in both writings his motives were largely political. It was because he regarded the writings and sayings
of Sir William Hamilton as the great fortress of intuitional philosophy in Great Britain that Mill undertook to counter his pretensions. In dealing with Comte, Mill distinguished sharply between Comte's earlier philosophical doctrine of Positivism and his later religion of humanity. The doctrine he commended (as he had frequently done previously)
because he regarded it as a natural development of the outlook of George Berkeley and Hume; the religion he attacked because
he saw in it merely another attempt to foist a priestly hierarchy upon suffering humanity. It is noticeable that Mill's language
in these books is much closer to the language of Bentham and James Mill than it had been since his boyhood, and it was as
an act of piety that in 1869 he republished his father's Analysis of the Phenomena of the Human Mind with
additional illustrations and explanatory notes.
While engaged in these years mainly with
theoretical studies, Mill did not remit his interest in current politics. He supported the North in the U.S. Civil War, using
all his strength to explain that the real issue at stake in the struggle was the abolition of slavery. In 1865 he stood as
parliamentary candidate for Westminster, on conditions strictly in accordance with his principles. He would not canvass
or pay agents to canvass for him, nor would he engage to attend to the local business of the constituency. He was with difficulty
persuaded even to address a meeting of the electors but was elected. He took an active part in the debates preceding the passage
of the 1867 Reform Bill, and helped to extort from the government several useful modifications of the bill, for the prevention
of corrupt practices. The reform of land tenure in Ireland (see his England and Ireland, 1868, and his Chapters
and Speeches on the Irish Land Question, 1870), the representation of women (see below), the reduction of the national
debt, the reform of London government, and the abrogation of the Declaration of Paris (1856)—concerning the carriage
of property at sea during the Crimean War—were among the topics on which he spoke. He took occasion more than once to
enforce what he had often advocated, England's duty to intervene in foreign politics in support of freedom. As a speaker Mill was somewhat hesitating,
but he showed great readiness in extemporaneous debate. Elected rector of St.
Andrews University, he published his “Inaugural Address” in 1867.
Mill's subscription to the election expenses
of the freethinker and radical politician Charles Bradlaugh and his attack on the conduct of Gov. E.J. Eyre in Jamaica were perhaps the main causes of his defeat
in the general parliamentary election of 1868. But his studied advocacy of unfamiliar projects of reform had made him unpopular
with “moderate Liberals.” He retired with a sense of relief to Avignon. His villa was filled with books and newspapers; the country round it furnished him with a variety of walks;
he read, wrote, discussed, walked, botanized. He was extremely fond of music and was himself a fair pianist. His stepdaughter,
Helen Taylor (died January 1907), was his constant companion after his wife's death. Mill was an enthusiastic botanist all
his life and a frequent contributor of notes and short papers to the Phytologist. During his last journey to Avignon he was looking forward to seeing the spring flowers
and completing a flora of the locality.
Mill did not relax his laborious habits or his ardent
outlook on human affairs. The essays in the fourth volume of his Dissertations (1875; vol. 3 had appeared in 1867)—on
endowments, on land, on labour, and on metaphysical and psychological questions—were written for the Fortnightly
Review at intervals after his short parliamentary career. In 1867 he had been one of the founders, with Mrs. P.A. Taylor,
Emily Davies, and others, of the first women's suffrage society, which developed into the National Union of
Women's Suffrage Societies, and in 1869 he published
of Women (written 1861), the classical theoretical statement of the case for woman suffrage. His last public activity
was concerned with the starting of the Land Tenure Reform Association,
for which he wrote in The Examiner and made a public speech a few months before his death; the interception by the
state of the unearned increment on land and the promotion of cooperative agriculture were the most striking features in his
program, which he regarded as a timely compromise in view of the impending struggle between capital and labour in Europe.
He died in 1873, and his Autobiography and Three Essays on Religion (1874) were published posthumously.
A bronze statue of Mill stands on the Thames embankment in London, and G.F. Watts's copy of his original portrait of Mill hangs in the National Gallery there.
Influence and significance
Mill was a man of extreme simplicity in his mode
of life. The influence that his works exercised upon contemporary English thought can scarcely be overestimated, nor can there
be any doubt about the value of the liberal and inquiring spirit with which he handled the great questions of his time. Beyond
that, however, there has been considerable difference of opinion about the enduring merits of his philosophy. At first sight
he is the most lucid of philosophers. Many people have spoken of the marvelous intelligibility of his writing. Usually, however,
it is not long before doubts begin to creep in. Although the lucidity remains, its span is seen to be somewhat limited, and
one sometimes has the uneasy feeling that he is being equally lucid on both sides of a question.
Oddly enough, however, this judgment has
not led to any neglect of Mill. Little attention is now paid to Hamilton or to Whewell, but Mill's name continually crops up in philosophical discussions.
This is partly due to the fact that Mill offers a body of doctrine and a set of technical terms on many subjects (notably
on induction) that have proved extremely useful in the classroom. But a more important reason is that he has come to be regarded
as a sort of personification of certain tendencies in philosophy that it is regarded as continually necessary to expound or
expose because they make such a powerful appeal to serious minds. Thus he is or says he is a Utilitarian; yet nothing, it
is pointed out, could tell more strongly against Utilitarianism than certain passages in his writings. Then again, he is said to be an Empiricist (although he
says himself that he is not), and his theories of the syllogism and of mathematics are constantly used to demonstrate the
fatal consequences of this way of thinking.
It is misleading to speak without qualification
of Mill's Utilitarianism. Nor is it sufficient to add that Mill modified the Utilitarianism that he inherited from Bentham
and from his father in one way and another in order to meet the criticisms that it encountered in Victorian times. He does,
it is true, sometimes give that impression (as in his essay Utilitarianism); but elsewhere (as in his essay On Liberty) he scarcely attempts to conceal the fact
that his premises are completely independent of Bentham's. Thus, contrary to the common belief, it appears to be very hazardous
to characterize offhand the precise position of Mill on any major philosophical topic. He sometimes behaved with a reckless
disregard of consequences more suitable to a Romantic than to a Utilitarian. He is thoroughly romantic, again, and thoroughly
representative of his age in the eagerness with which he seeks out and endeavours to assimilate every last exotic line of
thought which shows any signs of vitality. He himself claimed to be superior to most of his contemporaries in “ability
and willingness to learn from everybody,” and indeed, for all his father's careful schooling, there was never anybody
less buttoned up against alien influences than Mill. In his writings there can be discerned traces of every wind of doctrine
of the early 19th century.
Major Works >
Politics and economics
Essays on Some Unsettled Questions in
Political Economy (1844); Principles of Political Economy, 2 vol. (1848; 2nd and 3rd eds. with important differences,
1849, 1852); On Liberty (1859); Considerations on Representative Government (1861); Utilitarianism (1863); On The
Subjection of Women (1869).
Major Works >
Philosophy and religion
A System of Logic (1843); Examination
of Sir William Hamilton's Philosophy (1865); Auguste Comte and Positivism (1865); Three Essays on Religion
Major Works >
Essays on “Bentham” (1838) and
“Coleridge” (1840) in Dissertations and Discussions, 4 vol. (1859–75), also reprinted together with
an introduction by F.R. Leavis (1950);
Autobiography, ed. by Helen Taylor (1873).
Major Works >
The definitive edition of the Collected
Works is that edited by John M. Robson et al., in 17 vol. (begun in 1963); each volume has a full introduction, notes, and indexes.
Additional Reading > Biography
The standard biography is M.ST.J. Packe, The Life of John Stuart Mill (1954,
reissued 1970), a fascinating book (including a bibliography), with interpretations sometimes too colourful. Mill's own Autobiography has been edited several times, for example by Jack
Stillinger (1969). Stillinger has also edited The Early Draft of John Stuart Mill's Autobiography (1961), written in 1853–54, which includes a much more vivid and intimate account of Mill's relations with his
father and mother; it suggests a more gloomy picture of his childhood than does the final version. (This is not a work that
Mill was himself prepared to publish.) Alexander Bain, John Stuart Mill: A Criticism with Personal Recollections (1882, reprinted 1969), will
never be superseded; an excellent, rambling account by Mill's closest philosophical disciple, it refers to many conversations
and quotes from letters now lost. F.A. Hayek (ed.), John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor (1951, reprinted 1969), is full of details about
the writing of Mill's works from the 1830s to 1858 (with gaps for times when they were meeting together); the painting of
Harriet Taylor should not be missed. Pedro Schwartz, The New Political Economy of J.S. Mill (1972), is an intellectual biography; Eugene R. August, John Stuart Mill
(1975), is a biography for the general reader.
Additional Reading > Comment and criticism
Richard P. Anschutz, The Philosophy of J.S. Mill (1953, reprinted 1969), a subtle and precise study presupposing
a wide reading of the texts; Karl W. Britton, John Stuart Mill: Life and Philosophy, 2nd ed. (1969), an introductory book—sympathetic
but critical; Élie Halévy, The Growth
of Philosophic Radicalism (1928; new ed., 1949, reissued 1972; originally published in French, 1901–04),
the standard comprehensive account of the school in which Mill was brought up, with issues fully analyzed and discussed (including
a bibliography); John P. Plamenatz,
The English Utilitarians, 2nd ed. (1958, reissued 1966), on the background and content of Mill's moral
theory; John M. Robson, The Improvement
of Mankind: The Social and Political Thought of John Stuart Mill (1968), offering an account of Mill's
life and of his mature views on morals, scientific method, politics, and sociology; Maurice Cowling, Mill and Liberalism (1963), an eccentric
account that imputes to Mill a strong strain of authoritarianism; Dennis F. Thompson, John Stuart Mill and Representative Government (1976), an analysis of
his Considerations on Representative Government; Alan Ryan, John Stuart Mill (1970), an attempt to show that a single
constant theory of inductivism underlies all Mill's writings; Richard
Halliday, John Stuart Mill (1976), arguing that behind Mill's eclecticism is
a coherent pattern of thought; Peter Winch,
The Idea of a Social Science, ch. 3 (1958, reissued 1977), an attack on attempts to construct a
causal science of human conduct; Francis H. Bradley, Ethical Studies, 2nd ed. (1927, reissued 1962), in which the third essay is an attack
on Mill's hedonism; G.E. Moore, Principia
Ethica (1903, reissued 1976), a very lively onslaught on Mill's Utilitarianism, often patently unfair;
C.L. Ten, Mill on Liberty (1980), an interpretation of the conflict between his Utilitarianism and his liberalism; J.O. Urmson, “The Interpretation of the Moral Philosophy of J.S. Mill,”
Philosophical Quarterly, 3:33–39 (1953), on moral rules; Ney MacMinn, J.R.
Hainds, and J. McCrimmon (eds.), Bibliography of the Published Writings of John Stuart Mill (1945, reprinted 1970).