Work Classification Layer
Compare Works
Pick two or more works to set their attribute fingerprints, dimension-by-dimension passages, and shared school embodiments side by side. Especially useful for author-stage comparisons (Wittgenstein early vs late) and for setting a single tradition's foundational texts against each other.
On Liberty
The sole end for which mankind are warranted in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number is self-protection
Attribute Fingerprint
Rows where works disagree are highlighted in gold. The full ontology grid is shown.
| Attribute | On Liberty |
|---|---|
| Time · Extent | Infinite |
| Time · Ontological Status | Substantival |
| Time · Grain | Continuous |
| Time · Freedom | Non-Deterministic |
| Time · Traversability | Linear |
| Time · Dimensionality | One |
| Time · Direction | Uni-directional |
| Space · Extent | Infinite |
| Space · Ontological Status | Substantival |
| Space · Curvature | Flat |
| Space · Dimensionality | Three |
| Space · Locality | Local |
| Matter · Extent | Infinite |
| Matter · Ontological Status | Substantival |
| Matter · Conservation | Conserved |
| Matter · Dimensionality | Three |
| Matter · Locality | Local |
| Observer · Time Instance | Single |
| Observer · Space Instance | Single |
| Observer · Knowledge Extent | Immediate |
| Observer · Knowledge Retainment | Immediate |
| Observer · Physicality | Embodied |
| Observer · Agency | Active |
| Observer · Number | Plural |
| Observer · Metaphysical Agency | None |
| Observer · Moral Authority | Reason |
| Observer · Theological Method | — |
| Energy · Extent | Finite |
| Energy · Ontological Status | Substantival |
| Energy · Conservation | Conserved |
| Energy · Dispersibility | Irreversible |
| Information · Ontological Status | Relational |
| Information · Cosmic Conservation | Conserved |
| Information · Personal Conservation | Non-conserved |
| Information · Granularity | Continuous |
Dimension-by-Dimension Evidence
What each work's passages reveal about its stance on each of the six dimensions.
Time
On Liberty
Mill's temporal framework is post-Newtonian, broadly realist about temporal succession. The argument for liberty rests on a non-deterministic conception of human action — individuals can genuinely shape their own lives within social constraints.
Space
On Liberty
Standard nineteenth-century space. Mill's social space is the civilised polity within which the harm principle is to be applied.
Matter
On Liberty
Standard background; the essay is not metaphysical. The practical context — human beings as embodied social animals living together in real political communities — is taken for granted.
Observer
On Liberty
The Millian observer is the rational individual who can come to know what is good for her through reflection, discussion, and "experiments of living." Embodied, plural, active, and committed to expanding the space of legitimate individual experiment. Moral authority is reason, but reason is embedded in social discussion — truth emerges from the clash of opinions, not from authority. The metaphysical agency is None — Mill's Autobiography reports a Victorian crisis of faith and subsequent broadly agnostic-utilitarian outlook.
Energy
On Liberty
Not engaged. Standard energetics background.
Information
On Liberty
Truth is preserved across history only by the active collision of opinion; orthodoxy that goes uncontested becomes "dead dogma, not a living truth" (ch. 2). Information is relational, conserved at the social level only through active controversy. Personal information is not philosophically privileged; the essay does not engage personal immortality.
Internal Tensions
Where each work's argument pulls against itself.
The harm principle is famously hard to apply: what counts as harm, what counts as a relevant other, where to draw the limit of self-regarding action. Mill's own application (ch. 4) excludes "civilised communities only" — leaving the imperial conditions of British India outside the principle. Modern liberal theorists (Rawls, Dworkin, Nozick) have developed Mill in different directions, and contemporary debates over offence, hate speech, and paternalism turn on where the harm principle's edges run.