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
    Legal moralism can be rejected on cost-benefit grounds wi... — Carmelics
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The harm principle is not necessary to justify restrictions on liberty

    Legal moralism can be rejected on cost-benefit grounds without rejecting legal moralism as such

    ConsequentialismJustice & Punishment
    ?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 & PunishmentConsequentialism

    Connections

    2 topics

    Rights & Liberty3 linked

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Justice & Punishment
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Moral Responsibility
    1 linked

    Related

    Mill makes principled exceptions to his general anti-paternalism for autonomy-en...Mill permits some forms of offense regulation to prevent public indecencyThe harm principle is not necessary to justify restrictions on liberty

    Similar

    Legal moralism can be rejected in cases like homosexuality, prostituti...87%It is not necessary to reject legal moralism as such in order to defen...85%Rejecting specific moralistic proposals does not entail rejecting the ...82%Many forms of legal moralism are unjustifiable81%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: mill-moral-political
    View source passageHide passage
    However these questions are resolved, it is doubtful that the harm principle is necessary to justify restrictions on liberty. Mill makes principled exceptions to his general anti-paternalism to defend the permissibility of restrictions on selling oneself into slavery and other autonomy-enhancing forms of paternalism. Mill does allow some forms of offense regulation designed to prevent public indecency. Moreover, though Mill does seem more consistent in his opposition to legal moralism, it is not

    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