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
    Mill's harm principle holds that self-regarding actions a... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→We humans are justified in interfering with the freedom of others under two conditions: preventing irreparable harm to another person, and preventing irreparable harm to oneself.

    Mill's harm principle holds that self-regarding actions affecting only oneself fall outside legitimate coercive interference, even to prevent self-harm.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Autonomy requires the right to make choices about one's own life, even mistaken ones, without state paternalism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Individuals possess superior knowledge of their own circumstances, values, and preferences compared to external authorities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Permitting coercive interference in self-regarding conduct creates dangerous precedent for expanding state control.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.No action is purely self-regarding; individuals exist in social webs with dependents and communities bearing indirect harms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Autonomy itself may be compromised by addiction, mental illness, or cognitive biases undermining truly voluntary choice.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.State can legitimately intervene when individuals lack full information or capacity to make informed decisions about serious risks.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Eternal Conscious Torment1 linkedAfterlife & Death1 linked

    Related

    Autonomy itself may be compromised by addiction, mental illness, or cognitive bi...Autonomy requires the right to make choices about one's own life, even mistaken ...Individuals possess superior knowledge of their own circumstances, values, and p...No action is purely self-regarding; individuals exist in social webs with depend...
    +3 moreShow less
    Permitting coercive interference in self-regarding conduct creates dangerous pre...State can legitimately intervene when individuals lack full information or capac...We humans are justified in interfering with the freedom of others under two cond...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit