The ideas behind the freedoms of thought, conscience and belief, and the right to express beliefs, are as old as human society. Social organisation is inevitable for people who live in groups, and group members are usually required to conform with prescribed behavioural patterns and subscribe to commonly held beliefs. But these same people also have to face life as mortal individuals, and in this respect the knowledge of personal mortality imposes on individuals a consciousness that the self is unique and separate from the rest of the social group, and that it is often necessary to ignore the collective good in order to pursue personal needs.
John Stuart Mill sought to resolve the conflict between the good of the society and the good of the individual with a simple formula:
"The principle is that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number is self-protection. That the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant."[4]
Mill’s utilitarian approach is based on the underlying moral principle that a person’s action should be judged by evaluating the consequences of the action for all those who will be affected by it. Starting with the assumption that a fundamental benefit will accrue to individuals by exercising their right to act, the only justification for preventing that action is if greater harm can be expected to accrue to other people. Whether or not the performer of the action actually benefits should be no concern of others.
The right of individuals to think freely and discover their own beliefs is an area which the European cultural tradition has defended against imposed conformity with particular ferocity since the Reformation. The words ‘freethinking’ and ‘freethinker’ did not begin to appear in English literature until the end of the seventeenth century, but there were people who described themselves as freethinkers as far back as the thirteenth century in Italy.[5] In the European Christian tradition, heretics have usually been severely punished, but at the same time there has also been a retrospective tendency to applaud heretics as ‘heroes who were badgered by ignorant and vicious men’[6] and who often overcame great obstacles to bring new ‘light’ into the world.
One advocate of freedom in thought has argued that it is superstition that inhibits freethinking and that ‘the mission of freethought is to relieve spiritual misery’.[7] The conquest of superstition is a widespread ideal in modern society, and the recognition of the role played by freethinking individuals in this quest is undoubtedly one of the reasons why the freedoms of thought, conscience and belief have been enshrined in Article 18 as inviolable human rights.
Next: The Technical Requirements of Article 18
[4] John S. Mill, ‘On Liberty’, p. 135.
[5] J. M. Robertson, A History of Freethought, p. 2.
[6] Barrows Dunham, The Heretics, p. 2.
[7] Karl Pearson, The Ethic of Freethought, p. 21.