1

The subject of this Essay is not the so-called Liberty of the Will, so unfortunately opposed to the misnamed doctrine of Philosophical Necessity; but Civil, or Social Liberty: the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual.

The part that I confused about this sentence is ‘so unfortunately opposed to the misnamed doctrine of Philosophical Necessity’.

First, I don’t know that if the word ‘so’ can understand either as an adverb or a conjunction. If ‘so’ is an adverb then in that sentence it means that the ‘Liberty of the Will’ is opposed to the misnamed doctrine. And if ‘so’ is a conjunction the sentence means that 'the subject' is opposed to the misnamed doctrine.

And second, I don't know what 'the misnamed doctrine of Philosophical Necessity' means. Does it mean that there are some doctrines in 'Philosophical Necessity' and the one that opposed to "Liberty of Will" (or subject) is misnamed or does it mean that 'Philosophical Necessity' is misnamed, and if this is true why the writer didn't write it as 'the doctrine of misnamed Philosophical Necessity'.

Please help me understand those. Thanks.

Improve this question
1
  • 1
    It seems to me there is a notion that the doctrine of Philosophical Necessity should always be something like the Liberty of Will that is a misnamed doctrine. But here the subject, not being the so-called Liberty of Will, opposes to that misnamed doctrine. Here the subject of this essay is Civil or Social Liberty: the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual. And, so is used as a conjunction.
    – mahmud k pukayoor
    Commented Apr 21, 2017 at 10:55

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
3

The subject of this Essay is not the so-called Liberty of the Will, so unfortunately opposed to the misnamed doctrine of Philosophical Necessity; but Civil, or Social Liberty: the nature and limits of the power which can be legitimately exercised by society over the individual.

Mill is telling us what this essay On Liberty is not about.

It is not about the so-called Liberty of the Will; so-called means that "Liberty of the Will" is itself a misnomer.

"Liberty of the Will" is opposed to the doctrine of Philosophical Necessity.

This opposition is very unfortunate: so unfortunately modifies opposed.

This doctrine (of Philosophical Necessity) is itself misnamed. Misnamed modifies the phrase "doctrine of Philosophical Necessity."

It's a lot to unpack in a short space.

Improve this answer
0

Sometimes English "in high places" is written in a complicated manner and that makes difficult to understand. It is useful to "break up" the sentence into its parts to see what is going on inside.

The author means to say that "the doctrine of philosophical necessity" as a whole is misnamed, or that "philosophical necessity" is a "misnamed doctrine" (for some reason, which may be his own learned opinion only) and that the 'so-called' "liberty of the will" is "so unfortunately" opposed to it. This is not just unfortunate, but SO UNFORTUNATE! That is the sense in which "so" was used -- 'SO' has definitely not been used as a conjunction here.

By the by, the use of 'so-called' suggests his possible opinion that "liberty of the will" is also misnamed!

Example:

The so-called middle class is very rich in this country.

The so-called master is seeking the advice of his students.

The so-called expert driver drove the car into the ditch.

Improve this answer
4
  • 1
    In fact the great social scientist has written a classically elegant opening sentence -- that, however, makes it somewhat difficult to understand for some readers.
    – English Student
    Commented Apr 21, 2017 at 10:50
  • I found some examples of the word 'doctrine' like 'the new doctrine of modernism' or 'the traditional doctrines of divine omnipotence'. This usage of the word doctrine make me confused. I still don't understand why the writer did not write 'the doctrine of misnamed Philosophical Necessity' instead of 'the misnamed doctrine of Philosophical Necessity'.
    – dominokitara
    Commented Apr 21, 2017 at 11:00
  • 'Doctrine' is a theoretical statement or strong generalisation that often becomes widely accepted by experts in the field. In his opinion, what is misnamed is not 'philosophical necessity' itself; it is the doctrine that is misnamed -- "the doctrine of philosophical necessity" is not the right name for it, and it should have been named "the doctrine of something else," in his opinion.
    – English Student
    Commented Apr 21, 2017 at 11:20
  • 1
    Example (this is not a real scientific example, but only meant to explain the usage) -- "I think the doctrine of reciprocal rest is badly misnamed. Of course I fully agree with the theory behind it, so elegantly propounded by the great ______ , and with such overwhelming proof; what I disagree with is the name of his doctrine -- considering the physical properties concerned, it should have been named "the doctrine of reciprocal motion!"
    – English Student
    Commented Apr 21, 2017 at 11:25
0

"So unfortunately opposed to the misnamed doctrine of Philosophical Necessity" means

which is so very unfortunately opposed etc.

"So" is an adverb here, modifying "unfortunately."

"The misnamed doctrine of Philosophical Necessity" means that it shouldn't be called the doctrine of Philosophical Necessity.

"Misnamed" modifies the entire phrase "doctrine of Philosophical Necessity."

Why didn't the writer call it "the doctrine of misnamed Philosophical Necessity"?

The writer might consider it possible to talk somewhere about "philosophical necessity." But he doesn't consider it correct to name a doctrine "philosophical necessity."

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .