Notes: Isaiah Berlin | Sociology Mains Optional for UPSC 2024 PDF Download

 Page 1


 
 www.YouTube.com/SleepyClasses 
 www.SleepyClasses.com 
  
Isaiah Berlin 
Backdrop 
• His father has pulled his family out of Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution and fled to England 
? Personal freedom destructed in the new socialist states of Soviet Union and in the East 
Central Idea 
• Personal freedom 
? “Should we be free to act as we wish and, if not, to what extent should we obey, and whom should we 
ob ey?” 
• No single unique way of life 
Details 
• Liberty 
? Negative Liberty: Extent to which we are free from interference, i.e., the area or realm that a person 
or a group can enjoy without being coerced by another person, group or government  
? Hobbes in Leviathan “A free man is he t ha t … is not hindered to do what he has a will t o ” 
? Positive Liberty: Freedom to be something or someone, “ t o be conscious of myself as a thinking, 
willing, active being, bearing responsibility for my choices and able to explain them by reference to 
my own ideas and purposes 
? Berlin says, we are free to the degree that I believe this to be true and enslaved to the degree 
that I am made to realise that it is not 
? Although the idea seems laudable but Berlin takes it to its logical conclusion: This idea gives rise 
to “self-mastery ” ethic (become true or higher self to fully realise one ’s potential).  
? But this could lead to situations where it is justified to coerce others to take steps for greater 
public good 
? It may prove to be a license to “ b u l l y , oppress, torture ” others in the name and on behalf of their 
‘rea l’ selves 
? T.H. Green says “ Th e ideal of true freedom is the maximum of power for all members of human society 
alike to make the best of t he m selves ” 
? Berlin argues that many a tyrant could use this formula to justify his worst acts of oppression  
? True freedom, as per Kant, revolves around the belief that “Nobody may compel me to be happy in 
his own way ” 
? While positive liberty is invoked to create a certain kind of person, supporters of negative liberty 
know that the perfection of humanity is a dangerous myth, however well-meaning, it inevitably leads 
to illiberal and usually nasty outcomes  
Page 2


 
 www.YouTube.com/SleepyClasses 
 www.SleepyClasses.com 
  
Isaiah Berlin 
Backdrop 
• His father has pulled his family out of Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution and fled to England 
? Personal freedom destructed in the new socialist states of Soviet Union and in the East 
Central Idea 
• Personal freedom 
? “Should we be free to act as we wish and, if not, to what extent should we obey, and whom should we 
ob ey?” 
• No single unique way of life 
Details 
• Liberty 
? Negative Liberty: Extent to which we are free from interference, i.e., the area or realm that a person 
or a group can enjoy without being coerced by another person, group or government  
? Hobbes in Leviathan “A free man is he t ha t … is not hindered to do what he has a will t o ” 
? Positive Liberty: Freedom to be something or someone, “ t o be conscious of myself as a thinking, 
willing, active being, bearing responsibility for my choices and able to explain them by reference to 
my own ideas and purposes 
? Berlin says, we are free to the degree that I believe this to be true and enslaved to the degree 
that I am made to realise that it is not 
? Although the idea seems laudable but Berlin takes it to its logical conclusion: This idea gives rise 
to “self-mastery ” ethic (become true or higher self to fully realise one ’s potential).  
? But this could lead to situations where it is justified to coerce others to take steps for greater 
public good 
? It may prove to be a license to “ b u l l y , oppress, torture ” others in the name and on behalf of their 
‘rea l’ selves 
? T.H. Green says “ Th e ideal of true freedom is the maximum of power for all members of human society 
alike to make the best of t he m selves ” 
? Berlin argues that many a tyrant could use this formula to justify his worst acts of oppression  
? True freedom, as per Kant, revolves around the belief that “Nobody may compel me to be happy in 
his own way ” 
? While positive liberty is invoked to create a certain kind of person, supporters of negative liberty 
know that the perfection of humanity is a dangerous myth, however well-meaning, it inevitably leads 
to illiberal and usually nasty outcomes  
 
 www.YouTube.com/SleepyClasses 
 www.SleepyClasses.com 
  
• Rational Society 
? Spinoza, Hegel, Marx all assumed that in a rational society the human lust for power and domination 
would fade away  
? Rational society ? everyone wants greater good, no need for coercion  
? Engles expressed the same view when he writes about “replacing the government of persons by 
the administration of things ” 
? In place of naked power, a rational society has laws, which although they may impede and restrict at 
an individual level, benefit the whole  
? Locke: Where there is no law there is no freedom 
? Montesquieu, Kant and Burke: Political liberty is not permission to do what we want, but the 
power and means to “ d o what we ought t o ” within a rational social structure  
? Rights of man in 18th C: idea was that liberation and law are same —> rational laws have authority 
of God, nature or history  
? We need state and its laws to shape us toward timeless values and productive ends and away from 
our irrational and base desires and instincts  
? Berlin agrees with F i c h t e ’ s statement “No one has r i g h t s … against reason ” 
? He notes that if one follows the rational view to its end, “ The re can be only one correct 
way of life ” 
? Wise people follow this way naturally, rest has to be shoe-horned into it for their own 
good 
? Also the rationale behind P l a t o ’ s enlightened class (Guardians) 
? Berlin points out the problem that this view only makes sense when it is presumed that 
we are rational and that those who d o n ’ t agree are not  
 
? B e rl i n ’ s Assumptions of the Rational Model 
? Everyone has one true purpose: rational self-direction 
? Ends of rational beings must fit into a single universal, harmonious pattern 
? All conflict and tragedy solely due to clash of reason with irrational  
? When everybody is rational, they will obey rational laws of their own natures, so will be wholly 
law-abiding and wholly free 
? But Berlin notes the following caveats 
? If I can see and appreciate what is true, then I have the authority to shape and control your life 
? “ Sover eign t y of the p eo p le ” in the French Revolution d id n’ t mean more freedom for Individuals 
Page 3


 
 www.YouTube.com/SleepyClasses 
 www.SleepyClasses.com 
  
Isaiah Berlin 
Backdrop 
• His father has pulled his family out of Russia after the Bolshevik Revolution and fled to England 
? Personal freedom destructed in the new socialist states of Soviet Union and in the East 
Central Idea 
• Personal freedom 
? “Should we be free to act as we wish and, if not, to what extent should we obey, and whom should we 
ob ey?” 
• No single unique way of life 
Details 
• Liberty 
? Negative Liberty: Extent to which we are free from interference, i.e., the area or realm that a person 
or a group can enjoy without being coerced by another person, group or government  
? Hobbes in Leviathan “A free man is he t ha t … is not hindered to do what he has a will t o ” 
? Positive Liberty: Freedom to be something or someone, “ t o be conscious of myself as a thinking, 
willing, active being, bearing responsibility for my choices and able to explain them by reference to 
my own ideas and purposes 
? Berlin says, we are free to the degree that I believe this to be true and enslaved to the degree 
that I am made to realise that it is not 
? Although the idea seems laudable but Berlin takes it to its logical conclusion: This idea gives rise 
to “self-mastery ” ethic (become true or higher self to fully realise one ’s potential).  
? But this could lead to situations where it is justified to coerce others to take steps for greater 
public good 
? It may prove to be a license to “ b u l l y , oppress, torture ” others in the name and on behalf of their 
‘rea l’ selves 
? T.H. Green says “ Th e ideal of true freedom is the maximum of power for all members of human society 
alike to make the best of t he m selves ” 
? Berlin argues that many a tyrant could use this formula to justify his worst acts of oppression  
? True freedom, as per Kant, revolves around the belief that “Nobody may compel me to be happy in 
his own way ” 
? While positive liberty is invoked to create a certain kind of person, supporters of negative liberty 
know that the perfection of humanity is a dangerous myth, however well-meaning, it inevitably leads 
to illiberal and usually nasty outcomes  
 
 www.YouTube.com/SleepyClasses 
 www.SleepyClasses.com 
  
• Rational Society 
? Spinoza, Hegel, Marx all assumed that in a rational society the human lust for power and domination 
would fade away  
? Rational society ? everyone wants greater good, no need for coercion  
? Engles expressed the same view when he writes about “replacing the government of persons by 
the administration of things ” 
? In place of naked power, a rational society has laws, which although they may impede and restrict at 
an individual level, benefit the whole  
? Locke: Where there is no law there is no freedom 
? Montesquieu, Kant and Burke: Political liberty is not permission to do what we want, but the 
power and means to “ d o what we ought t o ” within a rational social structure  
? Rights of man in 18th C: idea was that liberation and law are same —> rational laws have authority 
of God, nature or history  
? We need state and its laws to shape us toward timeless values and productive ends and away from 
our irrational and base desires and instincts  
? Berlin agrees with F i c h t e ’ s statement “No one has r i g h t s … against reason ” 
? He notes that if one follows the rational view to its end, “ The re can be only one correct 
way of life ” 
? Wise people follow this way naturally, rest has to be shoe-horned into it for their own 
good 
? Also the rationale behind P l a t o ’ s enlightened class (Guardians) 
? Berlin points out the problem that this view only makes sense when it is presumed that 
we are rational and that those who d o n ’ t agree are not  
 
? B e rl i n ’ s Assumptions of the Rational Model 
? Everyone has one true purpose: rational self-direction 
? Ends of rational beings must fit into a single universal, harmonious pattern 
? All conflict and tragedy solely due to clash of reason with irrational  
? When everybody is rational, they will obey rational laws of their own natures, so will be wholly 
law-abiding and wholly free 
? But Berlin notes the following caveats 
? If I can see and appreciate what is true, then I have the authority to shape and control your life 
? “ Sover eign t y of the p eo p le ” in the French Revolution d id n’ t mean more freedom for Individuals 
 
 www.YouTube.com/SleepyClasses 
 www.SleepyClasses.com 
  
? Mill wrote of the “ t y r a n n y of m a j o r i t y ” as being little different from any other kind of tyranny 
? For French philosopher Benjamin Constant, the real question was not who was in power, but how 
much power any government should have. 
? If one kind of slavery was voluntary, it still amounted to the same reduction of personal liberty  
• Berlin observes that contemporary philosophers have gone out of their way to separate politics and 
philosophy, yet the reality is that politics is “ i n d i s s o l u b l y i n t e r t w i n e d ” with every kind of philosophizing. 
? If we do not appreciate the power of political belief, some of these beliefs will inevitably go uncriticised 
and unnoticed — until it is too late  
Conclusion 
• Berlin was not against all social and political movements that seek to improve the lot of humankind 
• What he was against was “ t h e belief that some single formula can in principle be found whereby all the 
diverse ends of men can be harmoniously realised ” 
• Kant believes there is no value higher than that of the individual. Berlin also puts it that to manipulate men, 
to propel them towards goals which you — the social reformer — see, but they may not, is to deny their 
human essence, to treat them as objects without wills of their own, and therefore to degrade them … to 
behave as if their ends are less ultimate and sacred than my own 
• Lord Acton said, freedom is an end in itself 
? As J.S. Mill puts forth, there will be millions of experiments in living which will take place, many of 
which will fail, but at least those who fail will learn their own lessons 
? The problem with grand unifying visions of humanity or absolute theories is that they do not take 
account of people as they actually are rather than how we might like them to be  
• We are on safer ground when freedom is made the highest value.