Gerald Dworkin, professor of philosophy at the University of California-Davis, examines John What is the difference between “pure” and “impure” paternalism?. Outline of Dworkin on Paternalism (in James White text). Paternalism = limitations on personal freedom or choice, done to benefit the person. GERALD DWORKIN. MORAL PATERNALISM. (Accepted 9 February ) is a distinction being drawn between a man’s physical good and his moral good?.
|Published (Last):||8 September 2009|
|PDF File Size:||1.96 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||10.53 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Komrad – – Journal of Medical Ethics 9 1: Punishment in Criminal Law in Philosophy of Law. An AnthologyHoboken: Perhaps the most important gerale What concerns us about paternalismnarrowly construed, should spark the same concern about these closely related, similarly motivated cases. She argues that the state has a right not to be complicit in enforcing contracts that it believes to be immoral, because exploitative.
After all, it would be foolish to simply define something as paternalistic only if it issay, an instance of coercion, argue that a court not upholding a contract is not an instance of coercion, and therefore claim that the UD is not an instance of coercion. Paternalizm Issues The analysis of paternalism involves at least the following elements. Nevertheless the basic justification is paternalist because the consumer consents assuming the relevant information is available to him to the harm.
Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers paternakism, with links to its database. And these are sufficiently different to warrant different classification. But it is not at all clear that there is any insult the person dowrkin judgment is over-ridden. No significant costs or incentives dowrkin attached to the choices the agent faces. But opponents of the doctrine, often of a libertarian or conservative bent, object to the doctrine on the grounds that it is an instance of paternalist behavior.
While it is clear that for some to characterize a policy as paternalistic is to condemn or criticize it, that does not establish that the term itself is an evaluative one. It is clear that many nudges are not plausibly examples of manipulation. Given that the traditionalist believe that only a certain range of motives makes an act paternalistic, and that the desire to not be complicit is not one of them, they could agree that patetnalism is a non-paternalistic justification for the UD.
Whereas to over-rule a person to benefit others is to treat them as morally incompetent. Persons may be civilly committed if they are a danger to themselves.
Outline of Dworkin on Paternalism
Paternalism in Applied Ethics in Applied Ethics. The usual justification for paternalism refers to the interests of the person being interfered with. I will return to this definition later. The broadest is simply consequentialist, i.
Are there objections to the very nature of nudging itself? It is a distinct, substantive, question of whether, for example, if your character is made worse by what you do, you are worse off, i.
The second condition is supposed to be read as paternalusm from acting against the consent of an agent. Clear cases include threatening, bodily compulsion, lying, withholding information that the person has a right to have, imposing requirements or conditions.
One might adopt one analysis in the context of doctors and patients and another in the context of whether the state should ban unhealthy foods.
What is our interest in it? The group we are trying to protect is the group of pwternalism not manufacturers who gdrald not be smokers at all. It requires minors to have blood transfusions even if their religious beliefs forbid it. Why is transparency required? Whether he beats her, for example, is not. Mill will only allow restriction on freedom of person A in order to prevent harm or to positively benefit person B, but NOT to prevent A from harming A.
Perhaps certain subliminal messages are quite weak in their force; only people who already are thinking about buying popcorn are affected. With respect to the impossibility question one might believe either that it is not possible to do any good by acting paternalistically or that although it is possible to do some good paternalusm process will almost always produce bads which outweigh the good.
In dworoin to influence students to make healthier food choices as they pass the cafeteria options place the healthy foods at eye level and place the less healthy choices higher or lower than eye level. Climate Change and Optimum Population. Criminal Law, Misc in Philosophy of Law. So if dworkun person really prefers safety to convenience then it is legitimate to force them to wear seatbelts. The thought is that nudgers can harness this tendency by putting healthy foods at that level.
Jessica Begon – – Analysis 76 3: This is exactly the same information but those told A are more likely to choose the operation than those given B.
Gerald Dworkin, Moral paternalism – PhilPapers
Doing Away with the Agential Bias: He may, for example, be unaware of what is being done to him. In the case of objectionable nudging there seem to be a greater diversity of normative values at stake, and they seem to have no overarching conceptual unity.
At a minimum, this proposition means that when such officials institute gera,d kind of reform, they should not hide it from the public…If officials alter a default rule so as to promote clean energy or conservation, they should disclose what they are doing. The government requires people to contribute to a pension system Social Security.
This entry examines paetrnalism of the conceptual issues involved in analyzing paternalism, and then discusses the normative issues concerning the legitimacy of paternalism by the state and various civil institutions.