Ithink，then，thatMill，thoughessentiallyintheright，hasaninadequateperceptionofoneaspectofthequestion。
Elsewhere17*hecomplainsthatwehavesubstitutedanapotheosisofinstinctforanapotheosisofreason，andsofallenintoaninfinitelymore’degradingidolatry。’Here，heseemsinclinedtoattackallbeliefsnotduetotheindividualreasonactingindependently。Heaccentuatestoodecidedlytheabsolutevalue，notoffreedom，butofitsincidentalresult，contradiction。Heseemstoholdthatoppositiontoanestablishedopinionisgoodinitself。Hewouldapproveofcircle-squarersandperpetual-motionmakersbecausetheyopposeestablishedscientificdoctrines。Headmiresoriginalityevenwhenitimpliesstupidity。Intelligenceshowsitselfasmuchinrecognisingavalidproofasinrejectingafallacy；andtheprogressofthoughtisasdependentuponco-operationandtheacceptanceofrationalauthorityasuponrejectingerrorsanddecliningtosubmittoarbitraryauthority。Amanafteralloughttorealisetheimprobabilityofhisbeingrightagainstaconsensusofgreatthinkers。Millhimselfremarks，whencriticisingBentham，thatevenoriginalityisnot’amorenecessarypartofthephilosophicalcharacterthanathoughtfulregardforpreviousthinkersandforthecollectivemindofthehumanrace。’18*
That，Itakeit，isperfectlytrue，butisapttopassoutofsightinhisargument。Theidealstateisnotoneofperpetualcontradictionoffirstprinciples，butoneinwhichcontradictionhasledtotheestablishmentofarationalauthority。
III。THEDECAYOFINDIVIDUALITY
Ihaveinsisteduponthischieflybecauseasimilarerrorseemstointrudeintothemoredifficultproblemswhichfollow。