Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Good Samaritan laws and compelled testimony laws cannot b... — Carmelics
    Home/Rights & Liberty
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Mill's harm principle must rely on the broader harm-prevention rationale rather than the narrower anti-harming rationale

    Good Samaritan laws and compelled testimony laws cannot be justified by the narrower anti-harming rationale, which only covers the party whose liberty is restricted

    Rights & Liberty
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Rights & Liberty

    Connections

    1 topic

    Justice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    Good Samaritan laws and laws compelling testimony in court require justification...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Rights & Liberty
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Mill's harm principle must rely on the broader harm-prevention rationale rather ...
    Only the broader harm-prevention rationale can account for these laws

    Similar

    Good Samaritan laws and laws compelling testimony in court require jus...82%The anti-harming rationale only justifies restricting liberty to preve...81%Restrictions on A's freedom requiring A to benefit B may be justified ...78%The harm-prevention rationale justifies greater restrictions on libert...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: mill-moral-political
    View source passageHide passage
    The harm principle itself is complex in several ways. Harm to others is not a sufficient ground for restricting liberty. Rather, it creates a pro tanto reason for restricting liberty. Determination of whether restrictions on harmful conduct are fully justified depends on balancing the evils of regulation against the harm to be prevented. Moreover, it is not clear if the harm principle justifies restricting liberty to prevent others from being harmed or only justifies restricting liberty to preve

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective