Liberty and paternalism essay

Despite the fact that an adult may be aware of the consequences of not wearing his seat belt, it is also assumed that this person is not trying to injure himself, and values his life. Dworkin, on the other hand, feels that certain cases require the intervention of either society as a whole or its individual members.

If a person is harmed then their sovereignty no longer exists because it is the foundational position of power. Without these freedoms, one is not considered to be truly free. Mill takes on a utilitarian argument, explaining that allowing an individual to exercise his freedom of free choice is more beneficial to society than deciding for him what is in his best interests.

Both agree that paternalism is justified when the well being of another person is violated or put at risk. To what extent should liberty be limited and why should it be as such?

Dworkin, on the other hand, feels that certain cases require the intervention of either society as a whole or its individual members.

If a person were to be involved in a car accident and be seriously injured because he was not wearing a seat belt, he would come to the realization that he should have been wearing it.

As Dworkin explains in his essay, there are circumstances when a person is unable to make a rational and logical decision for himself.

Both agree that paternalism is justified when the well being of another person is violated or put at risk. Children and those who are unable to care for themselves are allowed to be interfered with beyond the harm principle due to the fact that they could possibly harm themselves unintentionally and therefore cannot have sovereignty over self p.

If this person does not realize that his health and his life is worth putting on a seat belt, it is safe to say that this person is illogical and irrational.

Liberty and Paternalism Essay

Another example for which this concept can be applied is the matter of seat belts. However, there are two main reasons for an adult not wearing his seat belt.

Liberty and Paternalism

Mill takes on a utilitarian argument, explaining that allowing an individual to exercise his freedom of free choice is more beneficial to society than deciding for him what is in his best interests.

This is so justified because at the time of giving chase to the ball, the child is unaware of the potential consequences of running into a busy street.

I agree with his theory because it allows citizens to experience their lives without an extreme number of constraints, all the while protecting themselves from harm that potentially could be caused by themselves or others.

Despite the fact that an adult may be aware of the consequences of not wearing his seat belt, it is also assumed that this person is not trying to injure himself, and values his life.

However, there are two main reasons for an adult not wearing his seat belt. As soon as people are capable of deciding for themselves they should then be given liberty from authority.

One opposition to this reasoning is that an adult differs from a child in that it is presumed that the adult can understand the consequences of his action whereas a child cannot. Therefore, in this case as well, it is justifiable for the decision to be made for him.Free College Essay Liberty and Paternalism.

The fight for freedom has been on going throught history; however, many philosophers have shared their theories as to why. In John Stuart Mill’s, On Liberty, Mill addresses the need for little state intervention in order to respect personal liberty and autonomy. In his essay, Mill stresses the importance of the individual and the need for government not to restrain these liberties through paternalistic means.

Liberty And Paternalism Essays: OverLiberty And Paternalism Essays, Liberty And Paternalism Term Papers, Liberty And Paternalism Research Paper, Book Reports. ESSAYS, term and research papers available for UNLIMITED access.

Liberty And Paternalism

Read this Philosophy Essay and over 88, other research documents. Liberty and Paternalism.

Liberty And Paternalism John Stuart Mill and Gerald Dworkin have distinctly opposing views on legal paternalism in that Mill is. Free Essay: LIBERTY AND PATERNALISM John Stuart Mill and Gerald Dworkin have distinctly opposing views on legal paternalism in that Mill is adamantly against.

LIBERTY AND PATERNALISM John Stuart Mill and Gerald Dworkin have distinctly opposing views on legal paternalism in that Mill is adamantly against any form of paternalism, whereas Dworkin believes that there do exist circumstances in which paternalism is justified.

Download
Liberty and paternalism essay
Rated 3/5 based on 87 review