John Stuart Mill on women, as explained by TC

 [[{“value”:”It’s interesting to think of Mill’s argument as it relates to Hayek. So Mill is arguing you can see more than just the local information. So keep in mind, when Mill wrote, every society that he knew of, at least treated women very poorly, oppressed women. Women, because they were physically weaker, were at a
The post John Stuart Mill on women, as explained by TC appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.”}]] 

It’s interesting to think of Mill’s argument as it relates to Hayek. So Mill is arguing you can see more than just the local information. So keep in mind, when Mill wrote, every society that he knew of, at least treated women very poorly, oppressed women. Women, because they were physically weaker, were at a big disadvantage. If you think there are some matrilineal exceptions, Mill didn’t know about them, so it appeared universal. And Mill’s chief argument is to say, you’re making a big mistake if you overly aggregate information from this one observation, that behind it is a lot of structure, and a lot of the structure is contingent, and that if I, Mill, unpack the contingency for you, you will see behind the signals. So Mill is much more rationalist than Hayek. It’s one reason why Hayek hated Mill. But clearly, on the issue of women, Mill was completely correct that women can do much better, will do much better. It’s not clear what the end of this process will be. It will just continue for a long time. Women achieving in excellent ways. And it’s Mill’s greatest work. I think it’s one of the greatest pieces of social science, and it is anti-Hayekian. It’s anti-small c conservatism.

That is from my podcast with Dwarkesh.

The post John Stuart Mill on women, as explained by TC appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.

 Philosophy, Uncategorized