According to mills harm theory, every individual has the rights to act as he wants, as long as these actions do not harm others. So as according to theory we don't have right to destroy the environment because if we destroy the environment it would not only harm the individual but also the others, it would harm the environment globally. So it didn't come under someone personal liberty, it becomes the matter of whole society (public) . So we didn't have any right to destroy the society.
Acc. to john stuat mill's theory " we do not have freedom to destroy the environment , because in his theory he gave two aspects i.e public/personal or major versus minor in which he says, It depends how much thing is affecting personal or public If we destroy the environment it particularly harm public. And his second aspects he said it depend how much people affected major or minor . By destroying the environmental it will affect major people.
J.S. Mill is a great champion of the individual liberty. He put restrictions to government interference in the life of the individual to the minimum possible. He held that democracy, public opinion and collectivism were dangerous to individual liberty and must be kept within their sphere of activity. He argued that individual should be left free to provide variety for the development of his personality Any effort on the part of the government was bound to lead in monarchy and mediocrity, which was not a healthy sign of the progress of the society He permitted the state to impose restrictions on the liberty of the individual if it resulted in an injury to the interests of other members of the community. He has developed his concept of liberty in his important work Essays on Liberty, He gives a complete and systematic philosophy of individual liberty.
Sir both because Mill's " theory of harm 'Has basically Two aspects one is personal vs public and second minor versus major. In context to the freedom of destroying the environment a person is allowed to do it untill unless it do not effect the social life of people living in society ..that is EFFECTING only MINORLY .. but if it disturbs the life of people on larger scale that is EFFECTING MAJORLY then Acc to the Theory of Mill's this act of Destroying the Environment thus will Not be allowed
According Mills Harm Theory of liberty which is divided into personal vs public and minor vs major,in context of freedom to destroy the environment a person is allowed to destroy the environment until it does not affect any other individual,for eg:-burning of crackers during Diwali is not only affecting the environment but also other individuals by polluting the air and ultimately affecting the health of individuals thus this issue is affecting majorily and at the public level which explains the Harm theory Mill
Answer- According to mills theory, we have not freedom to destroy the environment because it would be ultimately or indirectly harmful to other citizens also.
Since I figured out that optimum human dignity concept I find that PSIR is relatable to mathematics Mathematics is exactly the pursuit to optimise using various approaches
I don't agree with you bro because in math 2+2 is four but in political science me 2+2=4,5 or anything else because it's depends of person like liberty is different for Hobbes and Locke or it different from my perspective also
Sir do you mean that the minimum area and the maximum area(in the context of negative and positive liberty) Are to be overlapping for optimum human dignity space?
according to mills theory we dont have any right to distroy the envionment because according to mill''s harm theory it cant be under the private liberty its the part of public and mills theory itself says that if it is related to private liberty there is a minimum intervension but its is related to public then it have all the right to interven and take strike action against this and protect our environment .
Sir suppose i planted a tree long ago, and now i want to cut it due to construction of my house, since this tree is also a part of environment my action would be regarded as personal or public??
do we have reedom to destry environment ?? NO, becoz acc to mill harm theory there r 2 issues ; personal vs public nd minor vs major if we r cutting treees supposedly harming others nd also a major probem no oxygen to breeathe
In this toady world, nature is badly harmed. So the context of mill we should not have any right to destroy the environment and it is necessary for state to make the law on limited uses odf resource. J s mill also think in this way 😌😌
@@csprincekumar1512 iska rply to sir hi de Skte...But if u r interested in PSIR..Aap ashna sisodia mam ki special classes b dkh skte ho unacademy pe...They are also very good
Does it mean that the concept of equity is derived from the concept of positive Liberty as it says government to intervene into the personal space of individual to help him/her
Bakwas class...itna complicate kyu krre ho cheejo ko...asani se smjhai ja skti ha ye cheejin...expertise itna bhi nai hona chayea ki simplified na kr pao...aisa ni ha ki mujhe complicate batein smjh ni aati.. acharya Prashant ko bhi suna ha...sadhguru or osho ki batein bhi smjh aati ha..par ye cheej simply smjhai ja skti thi..par hosiyari marne k chkkr me bekar krdi class
Mere paas ek Sikka hai jo aapka yah pahle wala Naam hai please yah bataiye yah jo aap bata rahe Hain Jo aapka yah bada bada poster likha hua hai ismein sikke mein bhi likha hua hai
To avail the BEST offers on any Unacademy Subscription, click here: unacademy.onelink.me/RICs/jfgycm0j
According to mills harm theory, every individual has the rights to act as he wants, as long as these actions do not harm others.
So as according to theory we don't have right to destroy the environment because if we destroy the environment it would not only harm the individual but also the others, it would harm the environment globally. So it didn't come under someone personal liberty, it becomes the matter of whole society (public) .
So we didn't have any right to destroy the society.
Bhai itne achhe se sentence kaise banate ho
Acc. to john stuat mill's theory " we do not have freedom to destroy the environment , because in his theory he gave two aspects i.e public/personal or major versus minor in which he says, It depends how much thing is affecting personal or public If we destroy the environment it particularly harm public.
And his second aspects he said it depend how much people affected major or minor . By destroying the environmental it will affect major people.
4:40 start play 1.5 speed to save your time & if u fluent in Hindi .
Thank you🤣🤣
I am fluent in Hindi but not in English. 😂
@@shivagurjar8674 😂
J.S. Mill is a great champion of the individual liberty. He put restrictions to government interference in the life of the individual to the minimum possible. He held that democracy, public opinion and collectivism were dangerous to individual liberty and must be kept within their sphere of activity. He argued that individual should
be left free to provide variety for the development of his personality Any effort on the part of the government was bound to lead in monarchy and mediocrity, which was not a healthy sign of the progress of the society He permitted the state to impose restrictions on the liberty of the individual if it resulted in an injury to the interests of other members of the community. He has developed his concept of liberty in his important work Essays on Liberty, He gives a complete and systematic philosophy of individual liberty.
Sir both because Mill's " theory of harm 'Has basically Two aspects one is personal vs public and second minor versus major. In context to the freedom of destroying the environment a person is allowed to do it untill unless it do not effect the social life of people living in society ..that is EFFECTING only MINORLY .. but if it disturbs the life of people on larger scale that is EFFECTING MAJORLY then Acc to the Theory of Mill's this act of Destroying the Environment thus will Not be allowed
This kind of understanding is needed bcz nowadays the paper demands full clarity of concepts...... thankful to you sir!
4:25
Start here.
According Mills Harm Theory of liberty which is divided into personal vs public and minor vs major,in context of freedom to destroy the environment a person is allowed to destroy the environment until it does not affect any other individual,for eg:-burning of crackers during Diwali is not only affecting the environment but also other individuals by polluting the air and ultimately affecting the health of individuals thus this issue is affecting majorily and at the public level which explains the Harm theory Mill
Thankyou so much sir,only word in my mind is only outstanding sir . thankyou so much sir
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Answer- According to mills theory, we have not freedom to destroy the environment because it would be ultimately or indirectly harmful to other citizens also.
To avail the BEST offers on any Unacademy Subscription, click here: unacademy.onelink.me/RICs/jfgycm0j
How many times sir says ۔۔۔۔itna acha tumhai koi n padayaga ۔۔۔۔۔۔
Excellent and multiple dimension teaching and proud to be ur student on plus 🙂
Is sir will going to continie this course on youtube or not pls tell me
@@csprincekumar1512 sorry bro no idea
How can I meet with you BRO
Sir how much does it cost for plus subscription.... monthly ??
Fee?
Since I figured out that optimum human dignity concept
I find that PSIR is relatable to mathematics
Mathematics is exactly the pursuit to optimise using various approaches
I don't agree with you bro because in math 2+2 is four but in political science me 2+2=4,5 or anything else because it's depends of person like liberty is different for Hobbes and Locke or it different from my perspective also
🤣😂@@chetanshisode6914
No, Because of Mills Major, Public Harm Theory.
Sir do you mean that the minimum area and the maximum area(in the context of negative and positive liberty)
Are to be overlapping for optimum human dignity space?
according to mills theory we dont have any right to distroy the envionment because according to mill''s harm theory it cant be under the private liberty its the part of public and mills theory itself says that if it is related to private liberty there is a minimum intervension but its is related to public then it have all the right to interven and take strike action against this and protect our environment .
कथा वाचक बहुत बढ़िया !!!!
Continue this series.... please 🙏
Thanks sir
Thanku sir for the fantastic explanation... 😊I dont think mne kbhi b iss trh s political theory ko deal kia hoga
❤❤very informative
Sir suppose i planted a tree long ago, and now i want to cut it due to construction of my house, since this tree is also a part of environment my action would be regarded as personal or public??
Sir forhead shine like sun
top g lite
do we have reedom to destry environment ??
NO, becoz acc to mill harm theory there r 2 issues ; personal vs public nd minor vs major
if we r cutting treees supposedly harming others nd also a major probem no oxygen to breeathe
Eagerly waiting,,,,, Sir.
Apna subscription lia h lya
Kya
5:00
Thanks sir thank you so much
Thank you sir ❤️
Sir please remaining chapters ki bhi video upload kr dijiye sir🥺🥺🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Thank you so much sir....
Plz continue this session sir
In this toady world, nature is badly harmed. So the context of mill we should not have any right to destroy the environment and it is necessary for state to make the law on limited uses odf resource. J s mill also think in this way 😌😌
Sir what is the significance of the word minimum in the 'minimum zone of non interference'?
How can I join you sir for PSIR OPTIONAL?
I also want to know that
Speechless
Sir please make sessions on psir in youtube
Where can I find justice rights and equality Videos help please 🙏🙏
Sir thanks .....
Sir continue the series fully in English.....please
Sir is this enough for upsc... by the way thanks for this...
Eagerly waiting
Apna subscription lia h kya
@@studywithriyagupta1259 hnji
And it is worth it.
Is sir will going to continue this course on youtube or not pls tell me
@@csprincekumar1512 iska rply to sir hi de Skte...But if u r interested in PSIR..Aap ashna sisodia mam ki special classes b dkh skte ho unacademy pe...They are also very good
No
Waw sir☺️
Does it mean that the concept of equity is derived from the concept of positive Liberty as it says government to intervene into the personal space of individual to help him/her
Continue sir pls
Thank you sir. 🤓
anyone having subscription????
Sir ap baatein bhut karte ho 🙁
By the way guys topic start after 6:00 min
I am Alex kevadu 😉😉
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
teacher khud hi confuse hai kahna kya chahta hai
Bakwas class...itna complicate kyu krre ho cheejo ko...asani se smjhai ja skti ha ye cheejin...expertise itna bhi nai hona chayea ki simplified na kr pao...aisa ni ha ki mujhe complicate batein smjh ni aati.. acharya Prashant ko bhi suna ha...sadhguru or osho ki batein bhi smjh aati ha..par ye cheej simply smjhai ja skti thi..par hosiyari marne k chkkr me bekar krdi class
Egotist
ये unacademy में अच्छा पढ़ाता होगा पर youtube में हगता फिरता है। अब ये मुझे पता नहीं कि जान बूझकर या किसी और कारण से ?????
Sorry but maja ni aya ..... sir 🙁
Mere paas ek Sikka hai jo aapka yah pahle wala Naam hai please yah bataiye yah jo aap bata rahe Hain Jo aapka yah bada bada poster likha hua hai ismein sikke mein bhi likha hua hai
Dekhiae sar Jo sikke mein likha hua hai aapke pass bhej rahe hain libert lngobwetaust
Yah sab sikke mein likha hua hai iske matlab sar kya hota hai
thank you sir