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):||3 March 2016|
|PDF File Size:||8.68 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||17.95 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Libertarian Paternalism is the set of interventions aimed at overcoming the unavoidable cognitive biases and decisional inadequacies of an individual by exploiting them in such a way as to influence her decisions in an easily reversible manner towards the choices she herself would make under idealised conditions.
Let us start with the most startling.
Another situation that is similar to paternalism, but different, is collective limitations in order to gain a collective good e. Perhaps the person in fact consents but this is not known to the paternaliser.
The interference is justified, therefore, to promote the moral well-being of the person. So if a person tries to jump out of a window believing he will float gently to the ground we may restrain him.
Paternalism does not specify means; it specifies motives plus some characterization of the effect of an action. Relational Autonomy and the Social Dynamics of Paternalism.
But it also raises certain theoretical issues. Because it violates dignity? Until more refined notions of manipulation and of subverting rational decision-making are developed it may be more fruitful to look at specific nudges which strike one as problematic because of some identifiable features they have, and to distinguish them from other nudges which lack such features. Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic. A policy is paternalistic, then, if it cannot be justified by non-paternalistic reasons alone, payernalism the government adopts it only because someone in the relevant political process takes some paternalistic reason as sufficient to justify it.
The question becomes under what, if any, circumstances, can the presumption be overcome? Thaddeus Mason Pope – manuscript.
Paternalism | The Monist | Oxford Academic
To be sure it is not always easy to distinguish between legal moralism and moral paternalism. As a matter of methodology it is preferable to see if some concept can be defined in non-normative terms and only if that fails to capture the relevant phenomena to accept a normative definition.
But that will only show that some other term needs to be invoked. A broad paternalist is concerned with any paternalistic action: But in the first place no global judgment is being made that you are a bad person. Doing Away with the Agential Bias: The second condition is supposed to be read as distinct from acting against the consent of an agent. Consider the case where a husband hides his sleeping pills because he fears that his wife may find them and use them to commit suicide.
Weighing the Risks of Climate Change. And even if it is why is this an insult, if true? As with any policy intervention, either by the state or by private organizations, there are possible misuses to worry about. Some philosophers such as Feinberg have denied it.
Marion Smiley – – Journal of Value Inquiry 23 4: You pick them up, fit them together and now find they make a ball. If he knows, and wants to, say, commit suicide he must be allowed to proceed. She believes that the traditional idea of testing these against our linguistic intuitions is plausible but she thinks that it also should involve our normative intuitions.
Imagine 3 solid pieces of stone. Is there a burden of proof attached to paternalism? Institutions can be paternalistic. X does so only because X believes Z will improve the welfare of Y where this includes preventing his welfare from diminishingor in some way promote the interests, values, or good of Y.
Sign In or Create an Account. The government requires people to contribute to a pension system Social Security.
Jessica Begon – – Analysis 76 3: Paternalism in Paternlaism Ethics in Applied Ethics. It is clear that many nudges are not plausibly examples of manipulation. It may be that acts are primary in some definitions with the other elements being defined in terms of acts, or the order might be the reverse. But it is not at all clear that there is any insult the person dwor,in judgment is over-ridden. Given this background, there are at least three objections that have objected to features intrinsic to some—by no means all—nudges.
Call these broad nudges. The first thing to note is that the entire discussion of paternalism takes place in the larger context gerale a discussion of the Unconscionability Doctrine in contract law. Are the choices more autonomous in this case than in a case in which the food is placed in exactly the same way but deliberately in order to affect the choices?