Paternalism: A flawed basis for liberty-limiting policies? arguments against benevolent coercion
Identifikátory výsledku
Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11230%2F21%3A10434185" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11230/21:10434185 - isvavai.cz</a>
Výsledek na webu
<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=S5vl.Oo3_e" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=S5vl.Oo3_e</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.5817/PC2021-3-293" target="_blank" >10.5817/PC2021-3-293</a>
Alternativní jazyky
Jazyk výsledku
angličtina
Název v původním jazyce
Paternalism: A flawed basis for liberty-limiting policies? arguments against benevolent coercion
Popis výsledku v původním jazyce
This article discusses coercive paternalism, a concept of liberty-limitations that has gained significant attention in recent decades. In opposition to the libertarian type of paternalism proposed by the well-known 'Nudgers' Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein (2008), Sarah Conly (2013) advocates coercive interventions in Against Autonomy: Justifying Coercive Paternalism. Her influential work serves as a basis for scrutinizing the validity of coercive paternalism's presuppositions as well as the internal coherence of the concept. Following the fundamental groundwork of especially Joel Feinberg and Gerald Dworkin, arguments against coercive paternalism are evaluated. They include the reciprocal (rather than unilateral) relationship between the 'present self' and the 'future self' in the paternalist's account, the questionable legitimacy of punishment for self-harming behaviour and of coercion in general, the challenges of so-called 'perfectionism' and slippery-slopes, as well as a misconception about the alleged lack of rationality that serves as a justification for coercive paternalism. The article concludes by suggesting that - given the flaws of the concept - it may be reasonable to favour soft paternalism a la John Stuart Mill based on the harm principle over Conly's proposal for a more extensive form of coercive paternalism.
Název v anglickém jazyce
Paternalism: A flawed basis for liberty-limiting policies? arguments against benevolent coercion
Popis výsledku anglicky
This article discusses coercive paternalism, a concept of liberty-limitations that has gained significant attention in recent decades. In opposition to the libertarian type of paternalism proposed by the well-known 'Nudgers' Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein (2008), Sarah Conly (2013) advocates coercive interventions in Against Autonomy: Justifying Coercive Paternalism. Her influential work serves as a basis for scrutinizing the validity of coercive paternalism's presuppositions as well as the internal coherence of the concept. Following the fundamental groundwork of especially Joel Feinberg and Gerald Dworkin, arguments against coercive paternalism are evaluated. They include the reciprocal (rather than unilateral) relationship between the 'present self' and the 'future self' in the paternalist's account, the questionable legitimacy of punishment for self-harming behaviour and of coercion in general, the challenges of so-called 'perfectionism' and slippery-slopes, as well as a misconception about the alleged lack of rationality that serves as a justification for coercive paternalism. The article concludes by suggesting that - given the flaws of the concept - it may be reasonable to favour soft paternalism a la John Stuart Mill based on the harm principle over Conly's proposal for a more extensive form of coercive paternalism.
Klasifikace
Druh
J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science
CEP obor
—
OECD FORD obor
50601 - Political science
Návaznosti výsledku
Projekt
—
Návaznosti
S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach
Ostatní
Rok uplatnění
2021
Kód důvěrnosti údajů
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku
Název periodika
Politologický časopis
ISSN
1211-3247
e-ISSN
—
Svazek periodika
28
Číslo periodika v rámci svazku
3
Stát vydavatele periodika
CZ - Česká republika
Počet stran výsledku
21
Strana od-do
293-313
Kód UT WoS článku
000720385200005
EID výsledku v databázi Scopus
2-s2.0-85118762421