Hume, Kant, and Mill on Justice

            David Hume a Scottish skeptic, Immanuel Kant a German Critic, and John Stuart Mill in his own world, the trio of philosophers tried to address and assess very simple and quite similar concepts of not only human nature but also reason. Hume and Kant both were very influential personalities when it came to 1700s and had a huge effect on the philosophical standing. However, Mill was the pillar of Recent Modernity Stage. This trio of philosophers didn’t match each other even in the slightest regarding issues, the way of addressing, and philosophical standpoints.

Immanuel Kant

         In Prussia, Kant had born and studies there until he could easily stand on his own two feet. Unlike many other philosophers of the same time, he was definitely not negative or skeptical when it came to humankind. Instead, it was believed by him that it was the rational thought that produced moral reasoning. A rational man would never indulge in irrational choices and would only pay attention to the moral ones. With this, every man is offered an opportunity for using reason as more and as a moral guidance. He was also more linked scientific explanations and reasoning.

David Hume

            Compared to Kant, David Hume was completely different. Regarding academics, he never got a degree as he disclosed his course and pursued nothing philosophy. He was not only skeptic but he also showed hesitancy in approaching huge deals and he used to concentrate on emotions and memories. Unlike the former, he never believed in anything rational actually. Foremost, he believed that humans possess the free will to do anything and actually are at the stake of passions which are normally mistaken as reasons. Feelings are the ones which actually produce morals and not reasons. This is actually the main different between Hume, Kant, and Mill when it comes to philosophy.

John Stuart Mill

            Mill was renowned as a British philosopher who was highly skilled when it came to liberalism and played a major role in political economy, political theory, and social theory. Like Kant, Mill also took nothing more important than just the Morality. Similar to Kant, Mill believed that reasons were the ones which actually produced morals and not the feelings.

Contrast and Comparison of Hume, Kant, and Mill on Justice

            When it comes to justice, it is considered one of the most important and significant political and moral concepts. Although there are many definitions of the term in dictionary, philosophers always seek more than just the definition and etymology e.g. the justice’s nature is not bound to only political society’s desirable quality but it examples to character’s moral virtue and how the appliance is possible social and ethical decision-making. The debate on justice has been going on for years and it has grown through various level and development’s stages. Such stages are characterized and specific by various scholars. Ancient Greece is actually the first stage led by no other than Aristotle and Plato. Medieval Christianity is the second stage led by St Aquinas and St Augustine. Early Modernity is the stage led by David Hume and Thomas Hobbes. Lastly the Recent Modernity Stage was led by John Stuart Mill and Emmanuel Kant.

            When it comes to the perception of Hume on justice, it is actually serving material for public utility through the protection of property. His ideas on justice were broadly understand and realized by many philosophers. For Kant, justice is actually a virtue regarding the respect from people towards the dignity, autonomy, and freedom of others by not harming them, inhibiting what they are doing and interfering. According to him, justice is not violated as long as the rights of others are not being violated. What Mill believed in terms of justice was very similar to the line of thoughts of Kant as he said that justice is actually nothing but a collection of names or simply a collective name for all important utilities which are social and are conductive for fostering human liberty. In his definition, the term of protection of human liberty was also used which shows the relation between the definitions proposed by Kant and Mill.

            If the definition of justice proposed by Hume is compared to the one proposed by Kant the similarity can be observed with the presence of public utility. Both are paying importance to public utility which plays a major role in the justice. The difference between the two actually revolves around the protection of rights which was not presented by Hume. If justice of Hume is compared to the Justice of Mill then both similarities and dissimilarities can be observed. In both of the definitions, the utility of public is highly paid attention. It tells that no matter what happens, justice will surround public utility. While Hume presented it as nothing but an instrument, Mill states that justice is all about protecting and fostering the liberty of an individual which marks the dissimilarity. Compared to Hume, the definitions proposed by Kant and Mill were quite similar because of the integral part of liberty protection and illustrated the betterment of public.