ENG 396a ~ John Stuart Mill
Not a prisoner of emotion:

For a man who was depraved of emotion, or “tenderness” (58) throughout his boyhood, John Stuart Mill developed a sensitivity that would enable his intellectual convictions to be articulated with just enough passion to persuade his argument. Whether the topic is education or religion his analysis was not without humility regardless of his strict and isolated scholarship. Ironically the absence of a social upbringing instilled a certain appreciation for a structured and objective display of emotion. The first three chapters of Mill’s Autobiography serve as not only a tribute to those who influenced his life, but as a retrospective illustrating a psychological evolution.

Early on, his father’s tyrannical influence proved to be rewarding with libraries of knowledge and analytical abilities that surpassed most of the young boys his age. Mill admits, however, the defects of his education were the lack of “physical strength” (47), and limited ability in social skills of a non-analytical manner with his peers. He was kept from engaging with other kids his own age for fear that his father’s instruction might be tainted by “the contagion of vulgar modes of thought and feeling” (47). It is no wonder than that “This lesson of keeping my thoughts to myself at an early age, was attended with some moral disadvantages” (52). This suggests that without knowledge of some social etiquette of assimilation Mill was in fact free to express his opinion and fight for it with the methods he had so strictly learned.

Mill recognized the advantage of these so-called deficiencies. He was not good at physical activity, and that was fine because it afforded him more time for the lessons of his choice. The practice of the “Socratic Method”(38), and the debates practiced on walks with his father taught him how to take a stand. He brings to point an incident with another boy who attempts to sway Mill from his professed “disbelief” (53) of popular religious opinion:
My opponents were boys, considerably older than myself: one of
them I certainly staggered at the time, but the subject was never
renewed between us: the other, who was surprised and somewhat
shocked, did his best to convince me for some time, without effect. (53)
His rigorous educational training provided him with a foundation of logical conviction that recognized the paradox of popular religion. His opponents were not equipped with the analytical methods to deconstruct Christianity in the way Mill was able to. He was not subject to the “blind tradition” (52) of his peers.

The narrative embraces the hard discipline of his early education with a tone of appreciation and rebellion. Mill does not overlook the advantages he had, and could not since his father did constantly remind him of this. He remained a devoted son grateful for his father’s guidance. In reference to his religious stance Mill offers suggestions to “men of my father’s intellect” (53), and calls for a declaration:
Make their dissent known; at least, if they are among those whose
station, or reputation, gives their opinion a chance of being attended
to. Such an avowal would put an end, at once and for ever, to the
vulgar prejudice (53)
Write to Congress. These may be the words of a boy deprived of feelings, but they are also the words from a man who learned how to appreciate the weight of emotion. This narrative foreshadowed this kind of passion when Mill mentions his wife:
The one whom most of all is due, one whom the world had no
opportunity of knowing. The reader whom these things do not
interest, has only himself to blame if he reads farther, and I do
not desire any other indulgence from him than that of bearing
in mind, that for him these pages were not written. (26)