Author Archives: F. E. Guerra-Pujol

I have too much going on today, so I will resume my series on J.-J. Rousseau in my next post; in the meantime, enjoy …

In summary, if Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote the Second Discourse (1755) to explain how men lost their natural liberty in the remote past, he wrote yet another book, Du Contrat social (1762), to explain how they might recover their freedom in … Continue reading →

As I mentioned at the conclusion of my previous post, I will begin exploring some of the ideas of the great Jean-Jacques Rousseau next week; in the meantime, below is an amusing quote from Rousseau’s nemesis, Voltaire. By way of … Continue reading →

John Stuart Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville are in agreement that the “tyranny of the majority” poses the greatest danger of all to individual liberty, but what is to be done? We already saw Mill’s proposed remedy (the harm principle) … Continue reading →

I introduced John Stuart Mill’s libertarian harm principle (or what I prefer to call “Mill’s proviso”) in my previous post: people should be free to think, speak, and act as they please as long as no else is harmed. But … Continue reading →

N.B.: I dedicate this blog post to our nation’s military veterans. Does the law-liberty dilemma have a solution? One possible approach to the paradox of politics is to replace liberty with some other master criterion, and to this end, we … Continue reading →

I will resume my series on the paradox of politics in my next post; in the meantime, enjoy:

Why do I include the English social reformer Jeremy Bentham (1748-1843) in my survey on the “paradox of politics”? Because Bentham’s solution to the law-liberty dilemma is at once novel, original, and extremely dangerous! Before Bentham, the main goal of … Continue reading →