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 must rely on the broader harm-preve... — Carmelics
    Home/Rights & Liberty
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

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

    Rights & Liberty
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Good Samaritan laws and laws compelling testimony in court require justification under the harm principle
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.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
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Only the broader harm-prevention rationale can account for these laws
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mill's own text in On Liberty explicitly limits the principle to preventing harm to others, not to maximizing harm prevention generally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The anti-harming rationale can accommodate Good Samaritan cases by treating omissions as a form of harm when a duty relationship exists.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mill distinguishes between the harm principle as a liberty-limiting principle and separate grounds for positive duties, keeping the rationales coherent without collapsing them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Feinberg's taxonomy distinguishes harm-prevention from offense and legal moralism, and he treats anti-harming as a sufficient standalone rationale for most of Mill's cases.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Expanding the harm principle to a broader harm-prevention rationale risks licensing paternalistic and welfarist interventions Mill explicitly sought to rule out.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Rights & Liberty

    Connections

    1 topic

    Justice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    Expanding the harm principle to a broader harm-prevention rationale risks licens...Feinberg's taxonomy distinguishes harm-prevention from offense and legal moralis...Good Samaritan laws and compelled testimony laws cannot be justified by the narr...Good Samaritan laws and laws compelling testimony in court require justification...
    +4 moreShow less
    Mill distinguishes between the harm principle as a liberty-limiting principle an...Mill's own text in On Liberty explicitly limits the principle to preventing harm...Only the broader harm-prevention rationale can account for these lawsThe anti-harming rationale can accommodate Good Samaritan cases by treating omis...

    Similar

    Mill understands the harm principle in terms of harm prevention (HP2) ...92%The harm-prevention rationale is broader than the anti-harming rationa...92%Mill's statement of the harm principle mentions both preventing one fr...91%The harm principle can be applied prospectively to prevent actions tha...89%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    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
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit