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
    It is not clear that failing to rescue a drowning child h... — Carmelics
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Good Samaritan laws cannot straightforwardly be justified by appeal to the harm principle.

    It is not clear that failing to rescue a drowning child harms the child in the counterfactual sense.

    Justice & PunishmentRights & 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

    Justice & PunishmentRights & Liberty

    Connections

    1 linked claim

    It is not clear that failing to rescue a drowning child harms the child.

    Related

    Good Samaritan laws cannot straightforwardly be justified by appeal to the harm ...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Justice & Punishment
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    If the failure to rescue does not constitute harm, the harm principle provides n...
    It is not clear that failing to rescue a drowning child harms the child.
    The harm principle justifies restricting liberty only to prevent harm to others.

    Similar

    It is not clear that failing to rescue a drowning child harms the chil...96%Relative to the baseline of a world where the bystander was never pres...79%Whether a failure to rescue constitutes harm depends on the chosen bas...75%One may judge that Sergio ought to save the larger group of drowning p...74%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: mill-moral-political
    View source passageHide passage
    In discussing enforceable duties to give evidence or Samaritan aid, Mill claims that the failure to confer benefits constitutes harm. But it is not in general true that the failure to provide benefits always counts as a harm. In many cases it seems not to. You would benefit me by transferring all your savings to my bank account (let us assume); it doesn’t follow that your failure to do so harms me. Why not? Presumably, because we assess harms counterfactually: if x harms me, it makes me signific

    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