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
    Regulation of purely self-regarding conduct is paternalis... — Carmelics
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Regulation of purely self-regarding conduct is paternalistic and impermissible under Mill's harm principle.

    Justice & PunishmentRights & 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.The harm principle permits society to restrict only other-regarding conduct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Purely self-regarding conduct affects only the agent themselves.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Paternalistic regulation of self-regarding conduct exceeds the legitimate scope of social authority.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mill's own text permits compulsory education and social pressure against self-harm, suggesting self-regarding conduct is never truly isolated.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.No act is purely self-regarding, since personal degradation diminishes one's capacities for social contribution and harms those dependent on the agent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Gerald Dworkin's soft paternalism permits intervention when self-regarding choices are substantially non-voluntary, autonomous, or based on false beliefs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.John Rawls argues that rational contractors behind the veil of ignorance would endorse certain paternalistic protections to guard against future incapacity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A liberal framework committed to preserving the conditions of autonomy may require restricting present choices that irreversibly destroy future autonomous agency.
      ?

      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

    Justice & PunishmentRights & Liberty

    Connections

    2 topics

    Democracy & Governance1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    A liberal framework committed to preserving the conditions of autonomy may requi...Gerald Dworkin's soft paternalism permits intervention when self-regarding choic...John Rawls argues that rational contractors behind the veil of ignorance would e...Mill's own text permits compulsory education and social pressure against self-ha...
    +4 moreShow less
    No act is purely self-regarding, since personal degradation diminishes one's cap...Paternalistic regulation of self-regarding conduct exceeds the legitimate scope ...Purely self-regarding conduct affects only the agent themselves.

    Similar

    Moralistic or paternalistic legislation is permissible when it can als...85%Mill's harm principle is fundamentally concerned with non-consensual h...79%Restrictions justified solely by moralism or paternalism cannot be jus...79%The harm principle permits society to restrict only other-regarding co...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: mill-moral-political
    View source passageHide passage
    Sometimes Mill suggests that the harm principle is equivalent to letting society restrict other-regarding conduct (I 11; IV 2). On this view, conduct can be divided into self-regarding and other-regarding conduct. Regulation of the former is paternalistic, and regulation of the latter is an application of the harm principle. So on this view it is never permissible to regulate purely self-regarding conduct and always permissible to regulate other-regarding conflict. But, as Mill himself concedes,
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    The harm principle permits society to restrict only other-regarding conduct.
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit