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):||27 May 2006|
|PDF File Size:||12.96 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||9.20 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Climate Change and Optimum Population. Only the person benefited loses freedom Impure: Martin Dominic – – Science and Engineering Ethics 23 4: One might believe that one cannot make people better off by infringing their autonomy paaternalism the same way that some people believe one cannot make a person better off by putting them in a Nozickian experience machine one in which they are floating in a tank but seem to be having all kinds of wonderful experiences.
We consent to these, but must coordinate our behavior to reap the benefit.
Outline of Dworkin on Paternalism
Citing articles via Web of Science Obviously not all possibilities have been seriously put forward for acceptance. Such a refusal also seems paternalist. She believes that the traditional idea of testing these against our linguistic intuitions is plausible but she paternzlism that it also should involve our normative intuitions.
The standard here has to be one xworkin [impartial] rationality: The analysis of paternalism involves at least the following elements. Hypothetical Motives An act may be defined as paternalistic in terms of the reason for which A acts.
Suppose we presented an opt-out set up and said 1 we are doing this to increase participation in the retirement program, and 2 if this is effective it is because people have a tendency to stick with the status-quo. A narrow paternalist is only concerned with the question of state coercion, i. 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?
But not any way of treating his wife is within his sphere or control. Request removal from index.
David Crossley – – Journal of Business Ethics 21 4: Some nudges are more transparent in the sense that it is obvious they have been deliberately introduced and their motivation is also clear.
She argues that the state has a right not to be complicit in enforcing paternalims that it believes to be immoral, because exploitative.
There are nudges which are not paternalistic on their definition because the aim is to promote the general good—even if the chooser is not benefitted.
It is irrational to make the decision differently depending on how it is worded. Gerald Dworkin University of California, Davis.
So the normative options seem to be just two. Some philosopher such as Plato have asserted the truth of this view.
Given the very different conceptions of manipulation there is disagreement about why, when it is, manipulation is wrong.
Theory and PracticeOxford: Thaddeus Mason Pope – manuscript. Find it on Scholar.
Until more refined notions of manipulation and of subverting rational decision-making are developed it patwrnalism 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. Criminal Law, Misc in Philosophy of Law.
If one just appeals to intuition then this seems absurd. The government requires people to contribute to a pension system Social Security. My own reaction is to think of this as precisely the contrast class to paternalism. If he jumps because he believes that it is important to be spontaneous we may not.
Raphael Cohen-Almagor – – Philosophy 87 4: The charge of manipulation is raised often against the acts of others even when, like nudging, they are benevolently motivated. He allows for some paternalistic government intervention in the economy! But what about the following case?
Her proposal is to use as the metric whether the act warrants the same kind of normative reaction as the central case, i.
Some philosophers such as Feinberg have denied it. Ultimately the question of how to refine the conditions, and what conditions to use, is a matter for philosophical judgment. In pure paternalism the class being protected is identical with the class being interfered with, e. This is exactly the same eworkin but those told A are more likely to choose the operation than those given B.
Sometimes, however, advocates of state intervention seek to protect the moral welfare of the person. If it is an adult of sound mind the presumption is reversed.