Did Mill think rights are natural? Why does the answer to this question matter? You can answer that by explaining what purpose they serve and how they fit into his utilitarianism. Mill associates rights – especially free speech - with representative government which he thinks is the highest stage of political development. Does this mean that we acquire rights as we progress toward representative government? He thinks we have to be worthy of representative government and that we can demonstrate that we are unworthy of it. If rights are instrumental to representative government, and we are not worthy of representative government, do we lose our rights? Do you think Americans have shown themselves to be worthy? If so why, and if not, what kind of political system do you think we are worthy of?
Is someone who violates a COVID-19 shutdown also violating the harm principle? Consider this: Shortly after the “stay home, stay safe” order in NY was issued, a young man who was outside was asked why he was violating the order; his answer was “No one is going to tell me to stay home.” When asked if he wasn’t concerned about infecting others, such as the elderly or those with underlying health issues, he answered “They’re the ones who should stay home.”
Sample Solution