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?.
|Genre:||Health and Food|
|Published (Last):||14 March 2011|
|PDF File Size:||9.34 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.46 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Given that the traditionalist believe that only dworkln 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 there is a non-paternalistic justification for the UD.
Given that nudges are not coercive, that they are intended to promote the good of individuals as they themselves perceive that good, that they have been shown to often be effective, are there any plausible normative objections to their use?
The law requires you to wear a seatbelt when you drive because it believes that it is better for you to do so. It relies upon, and works in virtue of, the fact that we tend to go with the given even if there are better options easily available.
But one might believe that the question of whether more good than harm is produced is not simply an empirical one.
Or, one might consider the act as paternalistic even while conceding this point. Return to Course Home Page.
The agent may neither consent nor not consent. One issue dwodkin many nudges is what the person being nudged knows about the nudge. If it is an adult of sound mind the presumption is reversed. And these are sufficiently different to warrant different classification. In the case of harnessing non-rational tendencies for nudges these conditions are not satisfied.
Defining Paternalism | gerald dworkin –
Perhaps they are mistaken about what agents really value when they claim people prefer health to more sugary beverages. Children, Paternalism and the Development of Autonomy. The second objection to nudges has to do with a specific mechanism through which the end of nudging—promotion of agent ends—is sometimes accomplished. So the normative options seem to be just two. Employees are are asked to commit now to having a portion of their salary increase in subsequent years put directly into their pension plan.
Suppose we prevent persons from manufacturing cigarettes dwirkin we believe they are harmful to consumers. Thaddeus Mason Pope – manuscript. It is true that her analysis must classify the following as paternalistic.
University of Minnesota Press. It is because of cognitive bias to doing nothing to change the status quo that there are relatively fewer opt-outs than might be expected. Return to Theodore Gracyk’s Home Page. The question becomes under what, if any, circumstances, can the presumption be overcome? But one might still think there are sufficient differences in geralc case patfrnalism mechanism by which this is brought about so that it is important to distinguish them.
Ultimately the question of how to refine the conditions, and what conditions to use, is a matter for philosophical judgment. If gedald knows, and wants to, say, commit suicide he must be allowed to proceed.
If the good simply included items such as longer life, greater health, more income, or less depression, then it makes it look like an empirical issue.
One author actually links these background conditions to the definition of Libertarian Paternalism. In particular moral paternalism should be distinguished from legal moralism, i.
Paternalism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Most users should sign in with their email address. Weber, Michael, and Christian Coons,Manipulation: She argues that the state has a right not to be complicit in enforcing contracts that it believes to be immoral, because exploitative. Criminal Law, Grrald in Philosophy of Law.
The first theorists to emphasize these findings for making social policy were the Nudgers—Cass Sunstein and Richard Thaler Nothing corresponds to this in the definition above.
Call these broad nudges. Carson Strong – – Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 5 1. But similarity requires a metric.
Liberals tend to favor it as a way of enabling poor people who are taken advantage of to get out of contractual obligations. Whether this expansion of the dworkij of paternalism is warranted or not is a matter of what issues are being explored and whether such an expansion makes things clearer or more confused. But proponents do not follow this pattern. Clear cases include threatening, bodily compulsion, lying, withholding information that the person has a right to have, imposing requirements or conditions.
Two acts may have the same outcome, an improvement of B, yet only one counts as paternalistic. But manipulations vary in their strength or effectiveness.
Reference to the welfare or interest of Y is no longer a necessary condition. It is clear that while many nudges as defined harness bad reasoning, most do not.
Geraod would be when the mechanism by which the nudge influences is made public as well. Suppose I do not push you out of the way when I couldenvisaging minor bruises and scrapes, so that you will miss a business meeting where I believe you will make a seriously mistaken deal. In a way anti-paternalism is already incorporated into Kantian theories by their prohibition against lying and force—the main instruments of paternalistic interference.
Suppose we start paterhalism the presumption that paternalism is wrong. This entry examines some 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.