Ithink，then，thatMill，thoughessentiallyintheright，hasaninadequateperceptionofoneaspectofthequestion。
Elsewhere17*hecomplainsthatwehavesubstitutedanapotheosisofinstinctforanapotheosisofreason，andsofallenintoaninfinitelymore’degradingidolatry。’Here，heseemsinclinedtoattackallbeliefsnotduetotheindividualreasonactingindependently。Heaccentuatestoodecidedlytheabsolutevalue，notoffreedom，butofitsincidentalresult，contradiction。Heseemstoholdthatoppositiontoanestablishedopinionisgoodinitself。Hewouldapproveofcircle-squarersandperpetual-motionmakersbecausetheyopposeestablishedscientificdoctrines。Headmiresoriginalityevenwhenitimpliesstupidity。Intelligenceshowsitselfasmuchinrecognisingavalidproofasinrejectingafallacy；andtheprogressofthoughtisasdependentuponco-operationandtheacceptanceofrationalauthorityasuponrejectingerrorsanddecliningtosubmittoarbitraryauthority。Amanafteralloughttorealisetheimprobabilityofhisbeingrightagainstaconsensusofgreatthinkers。Millhimselfremarks，whencriticisingBentham，thatevenoriginalityisnot’amorenecessarypartofthephilosophicalcharacterthanathoughtfulregardforpreviousthinkersandforthecollectivemindofthehumanrace。’18*
That，Itakeit，isperfectlytrue，butisapttopassoutofsightinhisargument。Theidealstateisnotoneofperpetualcontradictionoffirstprinciples，butoneinwhichcontradictionhasledtotheestablishmentofarationalauthority。
III。THEDECAYOFINDIVIDUALITY
Ihaveinsisteduponthischieflybecauseasimilarerrorseemstointrudeintothemoredifficultproblemswhichfollow。
Therealdifficultyoftolerationariseswhenwehavetodrawthelinebetweenspeculationandaction。Isitpossibletodiscriminateabsolutely？togiveabsolutefreedomtothoughtandyettomaintaininstitutionswhichpresupposeagreementuponatleastsomegeneralprinciples？Ifmen，asMillasks，shouldbefreetoformandtoutteropinions，shouldtheynotbefreetoactupontheiropinions——tocarrythemout，solongatleastasitis’attheirownriskandperil’——intheirlives？19*Howdoestheprinciplepresentitselfinthiscase？Millhasdeclined20*totakeadvantageofanyassumptionofabsoluteright。Hewishestogiveapositiveground；toshowthatthelibertywhichhedemandscorrespondsinpointoffacttoanecessaryfactorofhumanprogress。Hisowndoctrineisthatthe’developmentofindividualityisoneoftheleadingessentialsofwell-being’；andheadoptsasidenticalthedoctrineofWilhelmvonHumboldt，21*thattherightendofmanis’thehighestandmostharmoniousdevelopmentofhispowerstoacompleteandconsistentwhole。’Humboldtconsidersthisendtobe’prescribedbytheeternalorimmutabledictatesofreason。’Millwouldprefer，wemaysuppose，tohaveregardeditastheuniformteachingofexperience。Ineithercase，itisabroadandelevateddoctrinewhichfewthinkerswoulddenyingeneralterms。
Itis，moreover，eminentlycharacteristicofMillinhisbestmood。Heneverwrotemoreforciblythaninhisexpositionofthisdoctrine。Heisnowstimulatedbythebeliefthatheispreachinginpainfullydeafears：Inadvocatingfreedomofthoughtordenouncingdespotismhewasenforcingthedoctrinesmostcertainofpopularapplause。Butnobodycaredmuchfor’individuality’orobjectedtothesubtlerformsofmoraltyranny。Themassesaresatisfiedwiththeirownways；andeven’moralandsocialreformers’wantasaruletosuppressallmoralitybuttheirown。
Millisutteringforebodingscommontothemostcultivatedclass。
Thefearlestthegrowthofdemocracyshouldimplyacrushingoutofallthehigherculturehasbeenutteredininnumerableformsbysomeofourmosteloquentwritersandkeenestthinkers。ThecourseofeventssinceMill’sdeathhascertainlynotweakenedsuchfears。Theproblemisstillwithus，andcertainlynotsolved。Mill’sviewiseminentlycharacteristicofhiswholedoctrine。How，startingasademocrat，hehadbeenledtoastrongsenseorthepossibleevilsofdemocracy，Ihavealreadytriedtoshow。Ihavenowtoinquireintotherelationofthisviewtohisgeneraltheory。
’Custom’inconductcorrespondstotraditioninopinion。Sofarasyoumakeityourguide，youneednofacultybutthatof’ape-likeimitation。’22*Youcultivateneitheryourreasonnoryourwillwhenyoulettheworldchooseyourplanoflife。Youbecomeatbestausefulautomaton——notavaluablehumanbeing；
andofalltheworksofman，whichshouldbeperfectedandbeautified，thefirstinimportanceissurelymanhimself。
Obediencetocustomimpliescondemnationof’strongimpulses’asasnareandaperil。Andyetstrongimpulsesarebutanameforenergy，andmaybethesourceofthe’mostpassionateloveofvirtueandthesternestself-control。’Individualenergywasonceperhapstoostrongforthe’socialprinciple。’Now’society’hasfairlygotthebetterofindividuality。Weliveindreadoftheomnipresentcensorshipofourneighbours，desireonlytodowhatothersdo，bowevenourmindstotheyoke，shun’eccentricity’asacrime，andallowourhumancapacitiestobestarvedandwithered。Calvinism，hesays，preachesexplicitlythatself-willisthe’onegreatoffenceofmen。’Suchacreedgenerates’apinchedandhideboundtypeofhumannature。’Menarecrampedanddwarfed，astreesareclippedintopollards。Ithaslostsightofqualitiesbelongingtoadifferenttypeofexcellence。’ItmaybebettertobeaJohnKnoxthananAlcibiades；butitisbettertobeaPericlesthaneither。’
Clippingandcrampingmeanslossof’individuality’，and’individuality’maybeidentifiedwith’development。’This，hesays，mightclosetheargument；buthedesirestogivefurtherreasonstoprovetothosewhodonotdesirelibertyforthemselvesthatitshouldbeconcededtoothers。Hismainpointisthevastimportanceofgenius，whichcanonlyexistinanatmosphereoffreedom。The’initiationofallwiseandnoblethingscomes，andmustcome，fromindividuals。’Heisnotsucha’hero-worshipper’astodesireaheroictyrant，butheardentlydesiresaheroicleader；andwhereeccentricityisareproach，geniuswillneverbeabletoexpand。Pressallpeopleintothesamemould，condemntasteswhicharenotthetastesofthemajority，andeverydeviationfromthebeatenpathbecomesimpossible。Yetpublicopiniontendstobecomemorestifling。
’Itsidealofcharacteristobewithoutcharacter。’’Alreadyenergeticcharactersonanylargescalearebecomingmerelytraditional。’ThegreatnessofEnglandisnowallcollective。Weareindividuallysmall，andcapableofgreatthingsonlybyour’habitofcombining。’’MenofanotherstampmadeEnglandwhatithasbeen，andmenofanotherstampwillbeneededtopreventitsdecline。’Theevilissummedupinthe’despotismofcustom。’
Chinaisastandingwarning。Ithadthe’raregoodfortune’ofpossessingaparticularlygoodsetofcustoms。Butthecustomshavebecomestereotyped，thepeopleallcastintothesamemould，andChinathereforeiswhatEnglandistendingtobecome。
HithertoEuropeanprogresshasbeenduetothediversityofcharacterandcultureofthevariousnations。Itislosingthatadvantage。Nationsareassimilated；ranksandprofessionsarelosingtheirdistinctivecharacters；weallreadthesamebooks，listennotquiteallofus？tothesamesermons，andhavethesameends。Theprocessisacceleratedbyallthepastchanges。
Theextensionofeducation，theextensionofmeansofcommunication，theextensionofmanufactures，and，aboveall，thesupremacyofpublicopinion，areallinitsfavour。With’sogreatamassofinfluenceshostiletoindividuality’itis’noteasytoseehowitcanstanditsground。’
WhenMill，asayoungman，suddenlyreflectedthat，ifallhisprincipleswereadopted，heshouldstillbeunhappy，hedidnotdoubttheirtruth。Butnowheseemstobeemphaticallyassertingthatthevictoryofalltheprinciplesforwhichheandhisfriendshadcontendedwouldbeitselfdisastrous。’Progress’
meantpreciselythesetofchangeswhichhenowpronouncestoleadtostagnation。Democracyinfullactivitywillextinguishtheveryprincipleofsocialvitality。Andyet，whenatalaterperiodMillbecameapolitician，hegavehisvoteasheartilyastheblindestenthusiastformeasureswhichinauguratedagreatsteptowardsdemocracy。Hissincerityinbothcasesisbeyondadoubt，andgivesemphasistotheproblem，howhispracticalpoliticaldoctrinecanbereconciledwithhisdoctrineofdevelopment。
Thefirstquestionprovokedbysuchassertionsisthequestionwhetherthisisacorrect，stillmore，whetheritisanexhaustive，diagnosisofthesocialdisease？MaynotMillbeemphasisingoneaspectofacomplexproblem，andseeingtheextinctionofthat’individuality’whichisreallyanelementofwelfare，intheextinctionofsuchan’individualism’asisincompatiblewithsocialimprovement？Hisgeneralaimisunimpeachable。Theharmoniousdevelopmentofallourfacultiesrepresentsaworthyideal。Thefirstormostessentialofallhumanvirtues，asHumboldthadsaid，isenergy；forthegreaterthevitality，themorerichandvariousthetypewhichcanbeevolvedbycultivation。Yetitmaybedoubtedwhetherthetwoaimssuggestedwillalwayscoincide。Energycertainlymaygowithnarrowness，withimplicitfaithandlimitedpurpose。Thestreamflowsmoreforciblyinadefinedchannel。IfKnoxwasinferiortoPericlesor，say，theJewtotheGreek，theinferioritywasnotinenergyorendurance。TheefflorescenceofGreekculturewasshortlived，ithasbeensaid，becausetherewastoomuchAlcibiadesandtoolittleofMoses。23*Culturetendstoeffeminacyunlessguardedby’renunciation’andregulatedbyconcentrationupondistinctpurpose。Asinthequestionoftoleration，Milloverestimatesthevalueofmerecontradiction，soinquestionsofconductheseemstooverestimatemereeccentricity。Yeteccentricityissurelybadsofarasitisenergywasted；expendedupontriflesordevotedtopurposeswhichawiderknowledgeshowstobechimerical。Tobalanceandcorrelatethevariousactivities，todirectenergytothebestpurposes，andtominimiseaneedlessantagonismisasessentialtodevelopmentastogivefreeplaytothegreatestvarietyofhealthyactivities。
Mill’sdoctrinemaythusbetakenasimplyingahistoricalgeneralisation。Historicalgeneralisationsarewrongasarule；
andonedefectinthisseemstobeevident。Areenergeticcharactersreallyrarerthanofold？Wemaydismisstheillusionwhichpersonifiedwholeprocessesofslowevolutioninthenameofsomegreatprophetorlegislator。Itmaystillbetruethattheimportanceoftheindividualhasreallybeengreaterinformerepochs。ThepersonalqualitiesofWilliamtheConquerororofHildebrandmayhaveaffectedhistorymorethanthepersonalqualitiesofBismarckorofPiusIX。Theactionofgreatmen，indeed，atallperiodswhatever，isessentiallydependentupontheirsocialenvironment；butpersonalidiosyncrasiesmaycountformoreinthetotalresultatoneperiodthananother。Thefortunesofarudetribemaybe，notonlymoreobviouslybutmorereally，dependentuponthecharacterofitschiefthanthefortunesofacivilisednationuponthecharacterofitsprimeminister。And，therefore，itmaybe，theindividualasamoreimportantfactorintheresult，seemstorepresentgreaterindividualenergy。Yettheenergyoftheoldfeudalbaron，whocouldrideroughshodoverhisweakerneighboursorcoercethemwithfireandsword，isnotnecessarilygreaterthantheenergyofthemodernstatesman，whohasbygentlermeansslowlytoweldtogetheralliancesofnations，tocombineandinspiritparties，todirectpublicopinion，andtoactthereforewithconstantreferencetothenationalorcosmopolitanorder。