Comparing Marx And Mill's Perspectives On Historical Development
Marx and Mill’s Perspectives on Historical Development They say that history is told from the perspective of the conqueror, but for two renowned philosophers, history in general was formed because of certain factors. These philosophers are Karl Marx and John Stuart Mill.
Karl Marx was a German Philosopher who became famous and controversial for his works on capitalism, communism and dialectical historical materialism. A few of his famous writings were the Das Capital and the Communist Manifesto. These literature have been the guiding principles for the revolution in some countries such as Russia (McLellan, 1). On one hand, John Stuart Mill was a British Philosopher who became famous because of his works on liberty and utilitarianism. But …show more content…
First, Marx focused on the economic aspect of societal progress or the material conception of history. He highlighted how one society progressed to another because of the pursuit for the economic means of production. On the other hand, Mill emphasized on the importance of liberty as he pointed out that this is the driving force of societal progress. This is what he called the philosophy of history.
Another point where the two philosophers differed is the way the minority sought for change. Marx argued that change is not handed down because the minority fought for it. The conflict between the two opposing forces resulted to the development of the new society. Meanwhile, Mill believed that change happened without disrupting the existing structure of society. For him, conflict did not arise, rather society just evolved as it is based on the current system. Also, as Marx argued that the superstructure like the government and religion were used to maintain the status quo. But, Mill saw the superstructure such as the religion to be the factors bringing change such as the case of Catholicism influencing the rise of
Karl Marx was a German Philosopher who became famous and controversial for his works on capitalism, communism and dialectical historical materialism. A few of his famous writings were the Das Capital and the Communist Manifesto. These literature have been the guiding principles for the revolution in some countries such as Russia (McLellan, 1). On one hand, John Stuart Mill was a British Philosopher who became famous because of his works on liberty and utilitarianism. But …show more content…
First, Marx focused on the economic aspect of societal progress or the material conception of history. He highlighted how one society progressed to another because of the pursuit for the economic means of production. On the other hand, Mill emphasized on the importance of liberty as he pointed out that this is the driving force of societal progress. This is what he called the philosophy of history.
Another point where the two philosophers differed is the way the minority sought for change. Marx argued that change is not handed down because the minority fought for it. The conflict between the two opposing forces resulted to the development of the new society. Meanwhile, Mill believed that change happened without disrupting the existing structure of society. For him, conflict did not arise, rather society just evolved as it is based on the current system. Also, as Marx argued that the superstructure like the government and religion were used to maintain the status quo. But, Mill saw the superstructure such as the religion to be the factors bringing change such as the case of Catholicism influencing the rise of