The Order in the Name of Liberty - Literature review Example

John Milton’s “Three Species of Liberty” In response to an Order by the British Parliament issued in 1663 requiring authors to gain approval from a governmental censoring board before they could publish a book, author John Milton wrote Areopagitica, a plea to the Magistrates to repeal the Order in the name of liberty. Milton’s idea of liberty, as it becomes expressed here and in his other writings, encapsulated the idea of allowing and encouraging men to think and to challenge their ideas by knowing the thoughts of others. At the core of every argument in Areopagitica is the concept that true spiritual growth – as a nation, as an individual and as a system of beliefs – can only be gained by this practice. Any attempt to limit, restrict or define exactly what knowledge is gained or rejected, therefore, is a violation of liberties on a grand scale. In arguing for the repeal of the limiting order, Milton argues the Magistrates must take into consideration the character of the men who imposed the first restrictions, the consequences of reading in general on the populace, the inability of the new law to prevent the types of thought that it was intended to prevent and that such a law will only serve to discourage learning of any kind within the realm, having a tremendous impact on the civil and religious development of the citizenry. He writes in "Def 2" that there are “three species of liberty which are essential to the happiness of social life – religious, domestic, and civil”, all three of which can be found in the arguments within Areopagitica. According to Milton, civil liberty cannot be found in a nation or community that exists without strife or problems. Instead, the “utmost bound of civil liberty … that wise men look for” (4) is a place in which individuals feel confident that they can step forward to voice their complaints, have them listened to and carefully considered by those in authority and then quickly resolved to the satisfaction of the greatest possible good. Authority figures, for their part, increase their status when they are seen to listen to these concerns and take judicious and fair action on them, enabling them to rule justly and help repair social ills in other parts of the country. This becomes a domino effect of benefit for the entire state as officials and citizenry both begin to take more active, responsible roles in their communities. In other words, civil liberty depends upon a cyclical system in which the public is able to express their grievances to the Magistrates and the Magistrates are seen to respond. Central to this ability of the nation to communicate among the various levels of its populace is an ability to freely disseminate information, including the thoughts and opinions of philosophers and theologians, those for and those against the current systems in place. This exploration, he insists, is essential to providing the nation with the civil liberties of discourse, pursuit of truth and wisdom that are necessary for a happy social life. By restricting the types of books that can be printed, Milton suggests the Magistrates are placing the common knowledge of the people into the hands of a very few limited individuals who may or may not know more about the subject they’re reading about than the author who wrote it, further suggesting that it is most probable that they know less. By placing the decision in these less capable hands, then, Milton says the people are not able to trust the reliability of the information being presented, understanding it only to be the version of the truth that the state condones. As a nation of thinking men, “a nation not slow and dull, but of a quick, ingenious and piercing spirit, acute to invent, subtle and sinewy to discourse, not beneath the reach of any point the highest that human capacity can soar to” (32), to so reduce the knowledge base available is equal to an enemy invasion on the nation’s natural resources. In addition, Milton argues that the censoring of books by the government will not be sufficient to reduce the flow of undesirable information, but will instead force the government to become despotic in its regime and extremely invasive in its enforcement. He points out that the words of the Christian gospels were spread throughout Asia long before the written word arrived in much the same way that this nation of thinking men will be unable to contain the discussion of thoughts, whether written or not. Through these arguments, it can be seen how Milton’s ideas of civil liberty are shaped around the ideas of philosophical discourse, constantly testing and retesting the rule of law for its greatest good as it works to develop an ever-increasing pool of knowledge regarding the natural and spiritual world. Rather than serving to tear the nation apart, Milton suggests this airing of differing versions of the truth is analogous to the building of a structure, in which each part, though different, plays an important role in the display. When government seeks to control the parts that are placed in the building, he says, “when every stone is laid artfully together, it cannot be united into a continuity … nay rather the perfection consists in this, that, out of many moderate varieties and brotherly dissimilitudes that are not vastly disproportional, arises the goodly and the graceful symmetry the commends the whole pile and structure” (32). In other words, only when the investigations are allowed to go according to God’s divine will, as it is stirred in the minds and hearts the thinking men themselves, in the direction they feel compelled to go with no interference from the state regarding what is deemed best for them, can civil liberties be guaranteed to the citizenry thanks to the active engagement and lively discourse thus engendered. This expression and discourse regarding all things civil is considered by Milton just as necessary to the development of a nation as it to the development of domestic happiness. In Milton’s mind, every aspect of human life, including the most private activities conducted within the home, would necessarily need to be governed in the society implicated by the censorship of books. “We must regulate all recreation and pastimes, all that is delightful to man. No music must be heard, no song be set or sung … There must be licensing dancers, that no gesture, motion, or deportment be taught our youth but what by their allowance shall be thought honest” (18-19). However, it is in the actions of each individual that he indicates the nation derives its power. Therefore, a weak population made weak from within by a dictatorial censorship of materials, would equal a weak nation unable to defend itself against the attacks from without just as a weak congregation made weak by the censorship of the Inquisition, opened the avenues through which England had recently freed itself of religious oppression. Whether discussing civil liberties or domestic liberties, Milton’s analogy to the idea of a city besieged illustrates quite well his idea of how weakness and discord is quickly sown in the hearts and minds of individuals deprived of domestic freedom to grow according to his own direction. He describes this as a city being besieged, surrounded on all sides with no way of obtaining alternative information or communicating their own ideas. Again, whether discussing the individual mind or the citizens of the town, this constriction leads to greater activity, greater resistance and greater resourcefulness in defying the rules set forth: “the greater part, more than at other times, wholly taken up with the study of highest and most important matters to be reformed, should be disputing, reasoning, reading, inventing, discoursing, even to a rarity and admiration, things not before discoursed or written of” (34). Rather than having the effect of silencing unwanted ideas or perceived immoral thoughts as the governmental order intended, Milton argues that by violating domestic liberties, the state would actually be working to foster these very ideas by bringing them to the forethought of individual thought, to which human nature must and will find a means of expression, licensing or no licensing. Rather than allowing individuals to distribute information that is likely to be incorrect and ill-thought out thanks to the necessity of subverting the restrictions emplaced, Milton said it is better for the state to encourage the protection of domestic liberties, allowing the populace to explore those thoughts and talents that might be able to then better serve the nation. To be sure of their convictions, men must be free enough to make their own decisions regarding what is right and wrong, what makes a good government and what should be improved, what to read and what not to read and have an open environment in which to discuss these ideas without fear of reprisal. He can not know what is a just society, what is a good government and what is a happy life without having the opportunities to explore the differences as they are portrayed through the very avenues that the government was working to suppress. Therefore, domestic liberties are described as being the freedom to investigate those areas in which one feels compelled to investigate, exploring new talents and the ability to discuss these thoughts, ideas and discoveries with others of like mind. Finally, Milton argues that this type of censorial system denies all religious liberties in that it denies the God-given ability to choose, an essential element in obtaining spiritual growth. For this, he has another creative analogy that clearly illustrates the stagnation and decay that censorship has revealed in nations that have been under the long-time influence of the Inquisition. “Our faith and knowledge thrives by exercise, as well as our limbs and complexion. Truth is compared in Scripture to a streaming fountain; if her waters flow not in a perpetual progression, they sicken into a muddy poll of conformity and tradition” (28). Milton argued that a restriction on the freedoms of thought that the order for licensing represented also indicated an expectation that the citizens should allow someone else to do their thinking for them. This lack of use would lead to the same decay in form and ability that could be seen physically when muscles of the body were not used, creating people who were no longer able to determine morals and ethics on their own. This creation of automatons with no capacity for thinking on their own would serve only the devils work as it separates them from their natural spiritual path. He uses as support for his argument the idea that even God himself opted not to have automatons serving him on earth, but instead imbued mankind with the ability to think, and choose, for himself. Pointing to human reactions as proof, Milton said no one respects, loves or honors things that give love, obedience or devotion merely as a result of force or fear of the consequences. Instead, he says it is only through effort and experience that we are able to come to realize the depth of love freely given from one to another. In the same way, he says God places tests in front of people as a way of measuring them, testing their spirit and beliefs, allowing them to further define themselves in God’s own image if they so choose or to veer off in their own direction. “God therefore left him free, set before him a provoking object, ever almost in his eyes; herein consisted his merit, herein the right of his reward, the praise of his abstinence” (20). According to Milton, God intentionally places temptations and risks in front of us as a means of helping us to develop spiritually. By removing these tests and obstacles, the government is forsaking the intentions of God, standing in the way of the spiritual development of the nation and leaving it ripe for moral, ethical and social decay. Finally, the problem of determining whether a particular novel, book, pamphlet or other form of communication is good, evil, moral, immoral, anti-Christian or Christian affirming can never be left simply to a panel of individuals because of the highly subjective nature in which each person approaches a piece of work. The ignorant man picking up an illustrated version of Dante might be able to understand the general principle of the poetry, but the learned man can take much more sense from the same verses with or without illustrations. In addition, the evil ideas contained in a book written by an evil man can yet be put to good use when read by a righteous man. “To the pure, all things are pure; not only meats and drinks, but all kind of knowledge whether of good or evil; the knowledge cannot defile, nor consequently the books, if the will and conscience be not defiled” (13). As God himself entrusted the care, guidance and governance of each spirit each to itself, Milton argues that it is not the place of the state or the church to impose its will upon the choices of the individual. Thus, religious liberty is defined as being the ability to exercise the freedom of choice in relation to what a man does, reads, thinks, speaks and dreams. In conclusion, Milton brilliantly argues that only by granting citizens civil, domestic and religious liberty can a state hope to establish a happy and productive society even as he defines and illustrates his ideas regarding what these liberties represent. Civil liberty provides the nation with the ability to share ideas, learn and grow, achieve great technological advancements and discover greater truths that can bring the nation closer to God. Domestic liberty allows each individual to explore their own talents, knowledge, interests and develop the national thought according to his own skill and deportment, helping to define the national good and evil by his own actions and reactions. Religious liberty grants each individual with his God-given right to make his own choices, deciding for himself whether a thing is good or evil and how or if he wishes to incorporate this into his own being, whether he wishes to use it for good or evil regardless of the intent or knowledge of the author. Rather than restricting access to information or trusting the evaluation of information to the care of a select few who may or may not have the necessary incorruptible, nonbiased nature such a job would require, Milton argues the happiness of the social order depends upon open and challenging discourse regarding all things. “Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties” (36). Works Cited Milton, John. Areopagitica. Read More