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
    The harm-prevention rationale justifies greater restricti... — Carmelics
    Home/Rights & Liberty
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The harm-prevention rationale justifies greater restrictions on liberty than the 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.The anti-harming rationale only justifies restricting liberty to prevent those whose liberty is restricted from causing harm to another
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The harm-prevention rationale justifies restricting liberty to prevent others from being harmed more broadly
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A broader rationale licenses a wider range of restrictions
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The harm-prevention rationale is constrained by epistemic uncertainty: we cannot reliably predict which restrictions will actually prevent harm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The anti-harming rationale, by targeting demonstrated causal agency, produces more reliable harm reduction with fewer liberty costs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A rationale that reliably reduces harm with fewer restrictions is less expansive in practice than one that licenses speculative preventive interventions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mill's anti-harming rationale already encompasses harm prevention, since restricting the agent who causes harm prevents that harm from occurring.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If anti-harming restrictions prevent harm by targeting the causal source, the two rationales are extensionally equivalent in scope, not hierarchically ordered.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The supporting argument's premise that harm-prevention is 'broader' conflates the causal structure of harm with the range of potential intervening parties.
      ?

      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

    Related

    A broader rationale licenses a wider range of restrictionsA rationale that reliably reduces harm with fewer restrictions is less expansive...If anti-harming restrictions prevent harm by targeting the causal source, the tw...Mill's anti-harming rationale already encompasses harm prevention, since restric...
    +5 moreShow less
    The anti-harming rationale only justifies restricting liberty to prevent those w...The anti-harming rationale, by targeting demonstrated causal agency, produces mo...The harm-prevention rationale is constrained by epistemic uncertainty: we cannot...The harm-prevention rationale justifies restricting liberty to prevent others fr...The supporting argument's premise that harm-prevention is 'broader' conflates th...

    Similar

    The harm-prevention rationale justifies restricting liberty to prevent...94%The anti-harming rationale only justifies restricting liberty to preve...94%The harm-prevention rationale is broader than the anti-harming rationa...91%The harm principle justifies restricting liberty only to prevent harm ...87%

    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