Character building is treated in classical and Catholic thought as cultivating the virtues. There is a large literature on that, both theory and practice. Continuous discovery is confronted by the need for specialization in professional life, among other obstacles, so it presents a challenge in terms of time and energy. Many sidedness seems to be more of an attitude or an approach, which could be cultivated in all circumstances. Moral responsibility has the risk of agonizing over things you cannot control or even impact, so there is a need for balance. But it is certainly better than irresponsibility. The idea of cultivating nobleness under contemporary conditions could use more elaboration.
I hope you will revisit and elaborate on these themes.
You could turn this article into a self-help book!
I have to say, in a sense I see a good trend for substack but a Christian sanctification guide (or our "how to live a good life") would be a tempting article to read.
My phrase for this season of my life is “growth over comfort.” My aim is to be committed to the many areas of my life that need my commitment but to also experiment and try new things, to constantly be learning. I loved this post.
I really appreciated this post very much. I was not familiar with Mill's ideas in these regards and I found it immensely enriching. I will come back to this post and re-read it multiple times.
Isn’t the reason so much self-help is aimed at the maximisation of productivity because that’s what so many of us unfortunately need though? I love the sound of what you’ve written here, but having spent serious hours agonising and reading over this question of how to spend my time, I always come back to the worry that ultimately we live in an economic society where a lot of us need to spend most of our short and precious time in fairly mundane jobs, performing various bureaucratic tasks, which then require us to gently cajole others into doing the same. It just always feels to me like there’s a horrible mismatch behind the ideals of nobility and virtue, and the world of jobs. It makes me think about what you wrote in your piece ‘The difference between being idle and being lazy’: “Being idle works well for the creatively intelligent, the people well suited to certain work patterns, and the lucky.” Having dipped into the idler philosophy I see similarities between what they want and the principles of Mill’s philosophy that you’ve highlighted here, with the worry then that it’s only the creatively intelligent, the people well suited to certain work patterns, and the lucky who will get to fully enjoy the fruits of Mill’s approach.
I’m being too depressing aren’t I? Right?! (Happy new year!)
Interesting comment. Mill certainly wasn't an Idler (I hate that book), as he had a full-time job and produced all his other work on the side. You still may be right about Mill's relevance, but I think a lot of people would benefit from being more like this, even if that is weekend and evenings, and I don't see much self-help being offered to them.
So then! Where are the noble hearts and heroic souls with the courage to crack open history? Who by taking new personal and moral responsibility, in a single change of mind, heart and conduct, will blow the status quo strait to oblivion? Who will sail out into the tempest to cross a broad expanse of illusion, fantasy, deception and mirage; to seek out the safe haven of perfect knowledge, the calm anchorage of absolute certainty, and the just authority of incontestable immutable truth? Who will cross a storm tossed sea of mind, secured by conviction and perfect faith? And set a new course for civilization. https://www.lavitanuova.org.uk
Frankly, I don't understand. Nothing about this is "new," and pretending as such actually seems to go against Mills's principles—the very ones you are espousing here. I'm not trying to be pedantic, it's just that there is a whole tradition of "self-help," both given that title and functioning under other, less obvious titles, that have promoted precisely this kind of flourishing. Begin with, I don't know, Aristotle's virtue ethics...
Fair, and most wouldn't. But he was one of the first people in the "Western tradition" to ask how we should live, and people certainly have read him like that. Oh and btw thanks for drawing attention to Mill in this way—I should have started off that way—because if people unfamiliar with him started by learning about his father's educational regime they would probably be afraid to ever listen to the younger Mills...
Did Mill have any children of his own? If not, I wonder why we should listen to him on the subject. As people like Judith Harris have noted, before they have children many parents have ideas about how much effect they can have on children that turn out to be wrong.
Good post. An ambitious program from Mill.
Character building is treated in classical and Catholic thought as cultivating the virtues. There is a large literature on that, both theory and practice. Continuous discovery is confronted by the need for specialization in professional life, among other obstacles, so it presents a challenge in terms of time and energy. Many sidedness seems to be more of an attitude or an approach, which could be cultivated in all circumstances. Moral responsibility has the risk of agonizing over things you cannot control or even impact, so there is a need for balance. But it is certainly better than irresponsibility. The idea of cultivating nobleness under contemporary conditions could use more elaboration.
I hope you will revisit and elaborate on these themes.
You could turn this article into a self-help book!
I have to say, in a sense I see a good trend for substack but a Christian sanctification guide (or our "how to live a good life") would be a tempting article to read.
I wrote one
https://shawnruby.substack.com/p/christian-resolutions-for-a-good
I sort of think of Mill's "On Liberty" as a kind of incredibly rich self-help book already
On the literature; would you recommend anything? Either theory or practice!
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03343a.htm
Josef Pieper, The Four Cardinal Virtues
Julio Dieguez. He Knows not How: Growing in Freedom
Lawrence Scupoli, The Spiritual Combat
https://archive.org/details/SpiritualDoctrineOfFrLouisLallemant/page/n14/mode/1up
Thank you! Much appreciated.
My phrase for this season of my life is “growth over comfort.” My aim is to be committed to the many areas of my life that need my commitment but to also experiment and try new things, to constantly be learning. I loved this post.
I really appreciated this post very much. I was not familiar with Mill's ideas in these regards and I found it immensely enriching. I will come back to this post and re-read it multiple times.
I’m very pleased to hear that. Do read Mill also!
I so very much APPRECIATE you and this post. Exactly what I needed, exactly when I needed it.
I love the idea of “writing yourself a syllabus” -- what a brilliant project with which to build 2024.
So glad to find you're also a committed Millian. Do you know Skorupski's "Why Read Mill Today"?
Very committed! I do not, shall have a look, thank you.
Really cannot recommend too highly. Brisk, very well constructed, and beautiful.
Thanks for this!
Isn’t the reason so much self-help is aimed at the maximisation of productivity because that’s what so many of us unfortunately need though? I love the sound of what you’ve written here, but having spent serious hours agonising and reading over this question of how to spend my time, I always come back to the worry that ultimately we live in an economic society where a lot of us need to spend most of our short and precious time in fairly mundane jobs, performing various bureaucratic tasks, which then require us to gently cajole others into doing the same. It just always feels to me like there’s a horrible mismatch behind the ideals of nobility and virtue, and the world of jobs. It makes me think about what you wrote in your piece ‘The difference between being idle and being lazy’: “Being idle works well for the creatively intelligent, the people well suited to certain work patterns, and the lucky.” Having dipped into the idler philosophy I see similarities between what they want and the principles of Mill’s philosophy that you’ve highlighted here, with the worry then that it’s only the creatively intelligent, the people well suited to certain work patterns, and the lucky who will get to fully enjoy the fruits of Mill’s approach.
I’m being too depressing aren’t I? Right?! (Happy new year!)
Interesting comment. Mill certainly wasn't an Idler (I hate that book), as he had a full-time job and produced all his other work on the side. You still may be right about Mill's relevance, but I think a lot of people would benefit from being more like this, even if that is weekend and evenings, and I don't see much self-help being offered to them.
HNY!
"Aim at something noble"
So then! Where are the noble hearts and heroic souls with the courage to crack open history? Who by taking new personal and moral responsibility, in a single change of mind, heart and conduct, will blow the status quo strait to oblivion? Who will sail out into the tempest to cross a broad expanse of illusion, fantasy, deception and mirage; to seek out the safe haven of perfect knowledge, the calm anchorage of absolute certainty, and the just authority of incontestable immutable truth? Who will cross a storm tossed sea of mind, secured by conviction and perfect faith? And set a new course for civilization. https://www.lavitanuova.org.uk
Thank you, wonderful post worth pondering.
John Stuart Mill was a fascinating man and wonderful writer. Thanks so much for this post!
Frankly, I don't understand. Nothing about this is "new," and pretending as such actually seems to go against Mills's principles—the very ones you are espousing here. I'm not trying to be pedantic, it's just that there is a whole tradition of "self-help," both given that title and functioning under other, less obvious titles, that have promoted precisely this kind of flourishing. Begin with, I don't know, Aristotle's virtue ethics...
I wouldn't class Aristotle as self-help!
Fair, and most wouldn't. But he was one of the first people in the "Western tradition" to ask how we should live, and people certainly have read him like that. Oh and btw thanks for drawing attention to Mill in this way—I should have started off that way—because if people unfamiliar with him started by learning about his father's educational regime they would probably be afraid to ever listen to the younger Mills...
Sure but self-help presumes a much simpler, more accessible genre than the Ethics. I would make the Autobiography compulsory reading if I could...
Did Mill have any children of his own? If not, I wonder why we should listen to him on the subject. As people like Judith Harris have noted, before they have children many parents have ideas about how much effect they can have on children that turn out to be wrong.