SUBMITTED TO

SIR IMRAN SHAHID

SUBMITTED BY:
SHAISTA YOUNAS
ROLL NO:
3088
SECTION:
A
TOPIC:
OPEN BOOK REVIEW
SUBJECT:
PROSE II
DEPARTMENT :
ENGLISH

UNIVERSITY OF OKARA
 John Stuart Mill

J. S Mill was born in London on 20 May 1806 and died on 8 May 1873 in France .His
father Mill was a renowned philosopher economist,feminist,and historian.J.S Mill
was a British philosopher,political economist ,feminist and official. He was an
excellent thinker of 19th century . He was a contributor to social theory political
orientation and economics. He was influenced by Aristotle and Plato .In 1889
Gladstone mentioned J .S Mill as ‘’The Saint Of Rationalism “. He was also a
member of Parliament . He was known for advocacy of classical liberalism women
rights and voting rights.
Important works
1:A System Of Logic . 1843
2:On Liberty. 1859
3:Utilitarianism . 1861
4:Autobiography . 1873
5:Principles of economics . 1848
6:The Subjection Of Woman. 1869
ON LIBERTY
Liberty means “the power of doing what we need to do “. And also the absence of
restrains and restrictions.Mill argues that he believes on liberty . He gives primary
importance to individual freedom.This collaboration of individuality and disdain for
community runs throughout on liberty . Mill isn't in favour of to suppress people’s
opinions and behaviors . He argues the restrictions are acceptable only when an
individual harms others, otherwise society should treat diversity with respect .
Mill justifies value of liberty through utilitarian approach . His essays tries to shows
the positive effects of liberty on all people and on all societies as an entire.
“Liberty may be a freedom to measure your life within the way that you simply want
without the interference of people . they'll be a family or a society ’’
On Liberty may be a philosophical and documented essay of J. S Mill.Liberty means
“freedom or in dependency’’ Professor Seely says ;
“Liberty means the absence of restrains ’’
As a critic says ;
 “Liberty is sort of a will of man of doing what he likes ’’
J.S Mill is greatly influenced by Plato and Aristotle.He is also called feminist because
he raise his voice for the equal rights of girls . Basically consistent with him ;
“Liberty gives more or primary importance to an
individual’’.
Individuals have rights to try to to everything which he wants to try to to but not
harmful for society .
J.S Mill Political Philosophy
John Stuart Mill was the foremost influential English philosopher of the 19th
century. He was a naturalist, a utilitarian, and a liberal, whose work explores the
results of a thoroughgoing Empiricist outlook. In doing so, he sought to mix the
simplest of eighteenth-century Enlightenment thinking with newly emerging currents
of nineteenth-century Romantic and historical philosophy. His most vital works
include System of Logic (1843), On Liberty , Utilitarianismand An Examination of
SirWilliam Hamilton’s Philosophy (1865).
Mill embraces the political philosophy of “classical liberalism.” Classical liberalism
holds that so as for the state to be fully just, it must protect and respect individuals’
rights. These rights are following.
One person/one vote, and anyone can run position. In short, democracy. ownership of
one’s own body and labor power. In short, no slavery. private ownership of natural
resources (land, coal, etc.) and capital resources (tools, factories, railroads, etc.), and a
right of each person to interact in “Free exchange” with other persons. In short, a
capitalist financial system.
The rule of law, due process of law of law, a “fair trial” if one is accused of a criminal
offense. Free speech; speech should seldom if ever be restricted on the grounds that it
advocates a viewpoint that's “dangerous,” false, and/or immoral, offensive to others,
or unpopular. No “viewpoint-based” censorship.
A sphere of private privacy or liberty that has (at the very least) decisions about which
religion, if any, to adopt.
Classical liberalism insists that the rights of people to due process of law, “Free
speech, freedom of faith, etc.”
are nearly absolute. One thing that doesn't justify violating them is that the will of the
bulk. democracy should be limited by the need that individual and minority rights
might not be violated. Another thing that doesn't justify the violation of individuals’
rights is “the greater good of the community.”
Mill wants to defend what he calls “one, very simple principle of liberty”
What is this principle?
The only good reason that the state could ever need to restrict an individual’s
liberty is to stop harm to other, non consenting persons.
to know Mill’s principle, it'll help to differentiate 3 different principles:
1. The harm (to others) principle—the state is justified in restricting a person’s liberty
to stop harm to other, non consenting persons.
2. The paternalism principle—the state is justified in restricting the freedom of a
competent adult, albeit he threatens no harm to others, simply to stop him from
harming himself.
3. The legal moralism principle—the state is justified in restricting a person’s liberty,
even in cases where there's no danger of his harming others or himself, simply to stop
him from doing something that's “intrinsicially immoral” (i.e. immoral albeit it harms
no one).
Here are some laws which will be defended by appeal to the harm principle:
“Criminal prohibitions on murder, rape, robbery,
physical assault, and defamation.”
Some laws that are commonly defended by appeal to the paternalism principle. Laws
that need car occupants to wear seat belts, or motorcycle riders to wear helmets; laws
banning the recreational use of “hard drugs,” which require one to possess a doctor’s
prescription, before one can obtain many other drugs (e.g. antibiotics); the mandatory
withholding of Social Security contributions from one’s paycheck.
Some Laws that are commonly defended by appeal to the moralism principle: --
criminal bans on the desecration of corpses; on prostitution, “fornication,”
homosexuality, the distribution and/or .consumption of pornography, etc.
“Mill’s “one, very simple principle”
Tells us that the harm principle is correct,
But the paternalism and legal moralism

are incorrect and will be rejected.”

There are two alternative ways of interpreting the harm principle. consistent with
one,1st“ My act must be the explanation for harm to others before the state may
restrict it.”
In short we will say that Mill on free Speech: Perhaps his most interesting argument
against “viewpoint-based” censorship is that it rests on an “assumption of
infallibility” to which the censor isn't entitled.

Bertrand Russel
Bertrand Russel was born on May 18 , 1872 in United Kingdom and died on February
2, 1970 also in united kingdom. He got Noble prize in 20th century . He was a well
versed mathematician ,an apt logician an ingenious philosopher and a zealous
reformer .Russel is to be regarded as the greatest philosopher of his age .And his
contribution to philosophy is tremendous .His philosophy is skeptical , liberal
,practical and rationalistic .He does not believe in mysticism . He is a realist.That’s
why his philosophy is not traditional .
“He is a great humanist and pacifist and all his concerns towards humanity and
about secured future of humanity “
Russel important works
1: The problem of philosophy - 1912 .
2:Political ideals -1917 .
3:The conquest of Happiness - 1930.
4: unpopular essays -1950.
5: The future of mankind -1950.
6:On being modern man -1950.
7: Ideas that helped mankind-1946
8: Ideas that harmed mankind-1946.
9:Eminent men i have known -1950.
HIS BOOKS
1:The Praise of Idleness 1935
2:The Problems of Philosophy 1912
3:Why I Am Not A Christian 1927
4:History of Western Philosophy 1945
His Awards:
1:De Morgan Modal 1932.
2:Nobel Prize in Literature 1950
3:Jerusalem Prize 1963
Prose Style

Bertrand Russell is one of the greatest masters of English Prose. He revolutionized

not only the subject matter but also the mode of expression. He has in him a happy
blend of greatest philosopher and a great writer. He was awarded Nobel Prize for
literature in 1950. The subject matter of his essays may be very difficult but his

manner of expression is so lucid and simple that even a layman can understand him
without any special difficulty. It is a rare privilege which only few prose masters
enjoy. The precision and clarity which Russell’s prose style possesses are very rare in
the bulk of English prose.

Russell has justly been regarded as one of the great prose stylists of the 20th century.
Although he is not a literary writer yet his work devoted mainly to problems of
philosophy, ethics, morality, political, social life and economics, etc.
impresses us greatly by its literary qualities.
Of course, Russell's style sometimes becomes difficult for the average reader who
comes across sentences which he has read for more than once in order to get the
meaning. Russell’s style appeals mainly to our intellects and very little to our feelings
or emotions. He uses words simply as tools, to convey his meaning plain and effective
and not to produce any special effects. It is not a coloured or
gorgeous style. Nor is there any passion in it. It is somewhat cold.
There are no “jeweled phrases” in his writings nor sentences over which we would
like to linger with the aesthetic pleasure. Russell’s style is intellectually brilliant. He
can condense an idea or a thought in a few words if he so desires. Russell is always
direct, simple and lucid. He knows that the complexity of expression leads to
ambiguity. Nothing can be more lucid than such opening lines:

“Happiness depends partly upon externalcircumstancesand partly upon

oneself.”
“Of all the institutions that have come down to us from the past, none is so
disorganized and derailed as the family.”

Russell’s sentences clearly show Bacon’s terseness. They are replete with so deep
thoughts like those of Bacon that we may elaborate them in countless pages. Many
sentences are like proverbs, replete with deep meanings like:

“Extreme hopes are born of extreme misery.”

“One of the most powerful sources of false belief is envy.”

“Pride of a race is even more harmful than national pride.”

Russell’s quotations from the Bible, Shakespeare, Roman andGreek writers are
harmoniously woven into the texture of his thoughts. The Biblical phrases and
quotations lend sublimity to his prose and make his style scholarly. Russell
manipulates such allusiveness in order to make his ironical onslaughts more effective.
Irony is a principal instrument of his style. He ironizes the so-called modern minded
people. Russell makes frequent uses of wit and humour but his humour is generally
not pure fun or frolic.
Russell writes chaste prose and there is a rationalistic approach to life. As a deep
thinker and a man with scientific mood, he has infused into his style a new depth and
a stream-like continuity and clarityHis chief concern is to convey his ideas to his
readers. That is why his prose style exhibits his balanced personality. ‘Style is the
man’ applies to him more logically.Russell makes long sentences to pour out his
feelings with a poetic flash. He thinks deeply and expresses the matter in a logical
manner. The sentence is definitely long but the main link of the thought is not broken
anywhere. All subordinate clause move towards the main clause with the definite aim
of making the sense more clear. No part of the syntax is loose.
To conclude, Russell is one of the great prose writers of the last century, who wrote
an almost all kinds of varied subjects with great force and confidence. The unity of
his thoughts goes hand in hand with the unity of his style.

Function of Teacher
Russell introduced the theory about the Teacher. He says that about teacher:
“No man can be a good Teacher
Unless he has feelings of warm
Affection towards pupils.”
According to the Russell, the most important function of a teacher is to inculcate in
his pupil’s beliefs which are wise and sensible, in his mature opinion. As matters
stand today, teacher are unable to do their best for variety of reason.
“A teacher is the guardian of a nation.”
Russell focuses on this matter that what kind of a teacher should an ideal teacher and
suitable for mankind. He says that if a teacher works like a teacher then he can the
future of the nation and can build their character and he has ability to make a good in
the society. Teaching is the most respectable and honorable profession i.n the world
but in current situation is a tool in the hand of government. According to Russell,
teaching is not different from slavery because they are bound and they cannot teach
according to their own will, thought and experience because they do not have
revolutionary ideas and they are not a.
.ble to make creative to their student, due to new policies from superior their
occupation has bored. In these days, teacher is propagandist because they are bound in
policies of higher authority. So Teaching is just a boring job for them since they have
no freewill.
According to the Russell, teachers are the true guardians of civilization. A teacher
need not to possess high talent. But he must have the modern and up to date
knowledge and the knowledge in method of teaching. He should have sympathy,
affection and patience for his students.
So a teacher should have these following qualities:
A teacher should teach wise and sensible ideas.
If a teacher is wise, then he can deliver new and logical ideas to his students and
through his teaching he can build their character and can make them a good citizen of
the society.
A teacher should act as a guardian.
We a listen a common proverb that a teacher is the spiritual father of his students, and
we mostly observe that in our society a teacher takes much pain for the performance
and the future of students. And teacher has a careful behavior for his students.
A teacher should promote tolerance and reason.
The tolerance is the main character building element in the society so if a good
teacher creates tolerance in his students then they will have a good and positive
behavior toward society, and can make a good environment.
A teacher should teach the aim of useful life which change the luck and goal of a
nation.
Mostly the people have materialistic attitude toward society that is not real sense of
life but if a teacher creates a positive goal his students then he can change the luck of
society that leads towards the happiness and prosperity of life.
A teacher should be natural and impartial.

If a teacher is formal, then he cannot build the character of nation so he should be a

naturally good person so that he can be prove a good leader for nation and can make
responsible and creative to his students and nation. On the other hand, the teacher
should be impartial in his life, and he should have equal behavior for his all students.
Conclusion:
To conclude, we can say that the teacher is the guardian of the nation. He should
impart true knowledge to the students. He should teach objective realities being
impartial and neutral. He should not surrender before state or dictator. Rather he
should unstill he teaching of freedom and tolerance to produce a healthy nation.
Russell says about teacher:
Teachers are more than any other group the guardians of civilization.

Ideas That Have Helped Mankind

Russel was very sensitive so he introduced some ideas. According to the view of
Russell the ideas that helped mankind are of two types. Russell also explained some
political ideas that helped mankind and his opinion is that Govt. should accept the
liberty of individual.
The mean of help is that any step that is taken by someone for any other individual
that makes the things easier and beneficial.
Idea of Brotherhood:
Now here I shall discuss about the idea of brotherhood.
If we wish for a peaceful situation in the world then we need to develop such an
environment in which we feel sympathy with other human, if we do not have any
sympathy with other human than we can develop a peaceful environment where
human being can live with each other, and if anyone has hateful emotions towards
others then a destructive situation can take place. So Brotherhood is a great idea and it
should be build up a such an environment in the society in which happiness,
cooperation and strong relation can build in all members of the society and by act
upon on peace we can develop fruitful relations. Here if we add the views of Islam
about brotherhood then all the men are equal and anyone is not right to show his
superiority, other vise destruction and untrusting situation can be create in the society,
so we should live in a peaceful and happy environment and need to create an
environment of brotherhood in which everybody cooperate with each other.
Idea of Liberty:
This is the philosophy of Russell based on the ideas like idea of liberty and equality
and the basic idea is that an individual should be free to do whatever he wants to do.
Liberalism normally supports democracy, secularism, freedom of speech freedom of
civil rights. If someone criticizes on the acts of an individual then it is social tyranny
that need to discourage, on the other hand if an individual is harming to others
through his actions than it is not allowed, it mean there should be some positive
limitations in liberty. Russell says that if someone is harming to himself then it is only
his concern with himself and society not need to stop but in our own view this
behavior is dangerous. Slavery and liberty are connected with each other and it cannot
happen that idea of liberty exist and idea of slavery is not found, if evil and virtue can
exist in same place then ideas of liberty and slavery can also exist. Liberty is
important but no doubt that in liberty someone can feel slavery in it. Russell says that
after sufficient time Govt. should accept the liberty of individual. We can relate the
idea of liberty with the idea of world Govt.

Idea of Tolerance:

According to the views of Russell Idea of Tolerance is very important. Tolerance is

no doubt that it teaches us in many ways. Surely tolerance can be taught and learned
as like (Love is wise, hatred is foolish) these two lines are well connected with each
other. We have to learn the tolerance in the social relations.
Tolerance can change a personality when we live together and we must tolerate with
each other. Everybody is different in nature and living style of everybody is different
from one another. Some habits of a single man we like but some we dislike. We
should tolerate and think positive for another person. No doubt that tolerance is not
easy but it is not impossible. We can win many competitions of life with the pass of
tolerance. If we use tolerance in a good way, then it is also a key of success.
Idea of Charity:
Charity is essential and therefore meant to be done for public benefit, relief and
provide something to people. Specially when any bad time comes like war, natural
disaster, hunger, poverty, disease and many other horrible times. Charity makes a man
strong and teaches us humanity. We learn how we help others. Just like think to help
others and think positive, charity also makes a strongest nation. When everybody
helps others then poverty or hunger goes away. Prosperity becomes a part of life
through charity. We should take care of humanity. We should be aware about the
needs of our neighbors and family circle and try to fulfil their needs. Charity is the act
of extending love and kindness to others, it spreads care and beautiful feelings that is
the gift of God so this act can groom to humanity. Russell Said:
“When faith and hope fail, as they do sometimes,
We must try charity, which is love in action”

Future Of Mankind

Bertrand Russell has been a got genius man of 20th century .He was a great
philosopher and a very sensitive man.His works are mainly devoted to the problems
of philosophy, ethics, peace , morality. Politics economics and sociology etc. He was
already a realist but war made his approach even more bitterly realistic .
Russell surely disapproves the common established notion about philosophers
that they are absent minded an always busy their heads in making speculations ,when
he meditates the possibilities "regarding the future of mankind ".He has done
because of his high sensitivity and deep concern towards human being .
“He was called to a traitor in his country because of his anti _war stands
 during the first world war.”
Russell discuss the three possibilities about "the future of mankind "according to
him 1st, The complete extinction of human life on earth the second is that human life
will be reduced to barbarism and final is that there will be a world government that
will control all nations and countries .Among these the first possibility , which he
describes is the complete extinction of all human beings.This might happen after the
second world war in which the atomic weapons used.
The second possibility ,which Russell discusses,is the reversal of civilization to
its primitive conditions. Russell suggests if the second world war fails to eliminate all
signs of life,still that destruction would take world to the age of barbarism.Russell
says there may be a few libraries and liberties and scientists .But the people might kill
the remaining few scientists ,in hope of some "golden age"
The third possibility, according to Russell is the establishment of a universal
government all over the world .He discusses this idea in mire than in one way it
could occur. The one is the victory of America in the second world war,other is the
victory of Russia or the world government , would emerge as the result of mutual
agreement.
“The best among these ways is the idea of mutual agreement.”
Russell ' s view of world government has been criticized greatly people have
raised arguments considering it is a "utopian idea".Most of the people think that such
as alliance cannot be brought peacefully, for no nation would surrender her liberty.
Russell himself admits that
“The chances of world government in a formal ways are extremely remote.”

He thinks that a world government, would have to be brought about by force.

Another objection is that there is no need of a 'world government' , Because the wars
are a part of human history and civilization but still humanity has survived from them.
Wars create heroism and are necessity of life, without which human beings would feel
frustrated. To refute this argument, Russell has given his logical reasoning, that the
present condition of cold war would certainly lead to a dreadful atomic war and
eventually it would bring a complete devastation. And now modern wars are very
different from the wars in the past.
Russell says;
"There lies before us, if we choose, continual progress in happiness,
 knowledge and wisdom. Shall we instead choose death,
because we cannot forget our quarrels?"

Then he visualizes the "New world" after the emergence of either of the two
super powers i.e; Russia and America, as a victor of the war. Russell perceives a
secure peace prevailing, in the long run. Though there would be occasional murders
and minor revolts but in such a state any large scale rebellion would be out of
question.
Russell prefers America to control the world government and he has given
many reasons for his preference to America but his preference has no political or
ideological basis, but it totally depends on the probable condition of people under
these states.
The major reason to prefer America is that,
He respects the values of civilized life like freedom of thought,
freedom of inquiry and humaneness.

But on the other hand, in communistic countries like Russia, there is not liberty
for individuals and the government has a strict hold on the common masses.
Thus Russell says ;
"Its only aim is to promote the mindless repetition of party
and to have the ability of shifting sides rapidly,
so as to be always on the side of received opinions."

Moreover, there is considerably less orthodoxy in America that in Russia.

There, scientist, authors and philosophers can choose any subject regardless of state
interest. While in Russia such things are also influenced by official views.
Russell suggests another way to prevent a horrible war. In his opinion, America
would make an alliance with the British common wealth nations and with other
European nations who want to join them. All the military power, of these countries,
and weapons should be united and then they should declare war on the nation. In
this way Russia might also be agreed to join the alliance just by the threat of war. But
still he doesn't leave the possibility of Russian refusal.
In such an alliance, there should also be a legal check on the power of the
leader, by other nations, so there would not be a "Chance of corruption" which is
sure to accompany "Tower". In other cases, it would be such a combination of
states...
"Where force is not a prerogative of private individuals or nations,
but is exercised only by a neutral authority
in accordance with rules laid down in advance."

Among the many advantages, of a single world government, is that the defense
expenditures of every nation would diminish and by this way human beings would
be more happy than before.
In short we can say that But a little earlier than this, Russell's suggestions did
not seem to be implemented to the world. For, China has emerged, as a world power
with nuclear weapons and it would certainly not like America as the only dominant
nation to control both, East and West.