ipl-logo

Thaler And Sunstein's Argument Analysis

1503 Words7 Pages

Philosophers John Stuart Mill, Gerald Dworkin, Richard Thaler, and Cass Sunstein all tried to justify laws through three principles: the harm principle, legal paternalism, and libertarian paternalism. Mill’s harm principle only allows the government to create laws that impede an individual’s liberty to harm others. Whereas legal paternalism, according to Dworkin, allows laws to restrict an individual’s liberty for the individual’s own good. Thaler and Sunstein’s libertarian paternalism is different from Dworkin’s in how the paternalistic restrictions take place. The basis of all three is preventing an individual to harm others and I believe that sufficiently justifies laws. I also believe that Dworkin is correct in widening the justification of laws to include an individual’s harm or benefit to themselves.Thaler and Sunstein’s idea of nudging people to make beneficial decisions, I believe, is also correct. Any …show more content…

For a functional society, individuals must be protected from other individuals. The harm principle is why laws against murder, armed robbery, rape, etc. exist. These crimes are immoral in nature and should not be condoned in any way. A civil society is where the greatest total happiness can occur. In total, harm caused towards an individual is immoral and deserves to be punished by the law. I believe Mill’s objection of majoritarian interference is correct because otherwise, minority groups would have their freedoms infringed upon. For example, until recently, gay marriage was banned federally in the United States. The majority of Americans opposed gay marriage during this time as well. This majoritarian interference diminished the LGBTQ community’s freedom to marry. Although Mill also rejects paternalistic interference, we are looking specifically if the harm principle can justify laws. Mill’s principle is basic, but not only does it justify laws, it also provides the basis for other

Show More
Related

  • The Pros And Cons Of KECIP

    768 Words  | 4 Pages

    One thing stated by the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing is that there is a variation between doing and allowing. It is morally wrong to do a harm rather than allowing a harm to happen. She speaks of two types of duties: positive and negative. She speaks of negative duties or rights, “when thinking of the obligation to refrain from such things as killing or robbing” (380). Foot explains that a negative right is a right which is not to be harmed.

    Read More

  • Segal And Spaeth's Argument Analysis

    1314 Words  | 6 Pages

    In regards to the detailed studies of both Segal and Spaeth, and Brenan and Stier, valid points had been made for both sides of the argument. The question posed is rather or not stare decisis still exist in the courts rulings today. Segal and Spaeth analyze the rulings of dissenting judges of landmark cases since the start of the Warren Court while excluding cases with unanimous decisions and cases without progeny within the legal period. The areas of which they dissected and constructed the particular datasets for analyzing is superb as it specifically narrows down the specific information there looking for within their results. The findings from there assessments concluded that precedent did not play a overwhelming role in the sub sequential

    Read More

  • Sandra Bland Research Paper

    663 Words  | 3 Pages

    To prohibit conduct that unjustifiably or inexcusably causes or threatens substantial harm to individuals as well as

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of The Indian Removal Act Of 1790

    1501 Words  | 7 Pages

    The arguments were based majorly on legal and moral considerations. The legal arguments, which opponents advanced, were stronger than those of proponents of the Act. Morally, the arguments seemed to be equally strong. However, upon consideration of the entire arguments, numerical strength favored those of opponents. Also, all the arguments by proponents, except one, were objectively controvertible while those of opponents were not.

    Read More

  • Dark Ages Dbq Essay

    1021 Words  | 5 Pages

    Laws are for the good of people for not doing a crime and getting punishment for doing a crime. One of the main laws was the feudal law. It was an agreement with a lord and his vassals. A vassal had to do military and political service while a lord had to give the vassal a grant of land. The decline of feudalism happened when vassals would team up with other vassals and override the power of the king.

    Read More

  • The Rescue Defence Of Capital Punishment By Steve Aspenson

    744 Words  | 3 Pages

    Ross came up with a list of seven basic prima facie duties as they apply to individuals. These duties included a duty to (1) reparation, (2) fidelity, (3) gratitude, (4) justice, (5) beneficence, (6) self-improvement, and (7) nonmaleficence. Tom Regan’s Rights Theory stems around the idea that every person has four basic, semi-universal rights: (1) the right not to be harmed, (2) the right to aid when their rights have been violated, (3) the right to self-defense, and (4) the liberty right. In this paper I will also discuss Tom Regan’s worse off principle.

    Read More

  • Segregation In Letter From Birmingham Jail

    946 Words  | 4 Pages

    Laws can easily be differentiated on whether they are, or are not, just by checking if it follows certain guidelines told by Martin Luther King. In addition, if the laws are don't obey the set principles, then they end up harshly influencing people. King specifically stated the definition of an unjust law in the text, “An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.” (pg. 29, par. 16). He explains that a unjust law morally is incorrect, and shouldn't be followed as it doesn't help put the community.

    Read More

  • Early American's Choices Essay

    547 Words  | 3 Pages

    How did early Americans’ choices shape the America of today? How did their actions lead to and affect the life that we know in our nation? We can begin with looking at early Americans and how they used deception to take land from Indians. They took advantage of the Indians’ kindness for weakness. Americans wanted gold and fortune and allowed their greed to be their motivation.

    Read More

  • Merton's Strain Theory

    822 Words  | 4 Pages

    There are many theories that suggest that crime is constructed socially, or is a product of the society in which the crime is committed. One such theory, proposed by Robert Merton, is known as strain theory. While strain theory is a useful model for explaining how societal values can drive people to commit crimes, it has several flaws and does not focus on how laws are made and how this contributes to the formation of crime. While Merton suggests that laws are created from consensus within a society, it will be argued that strain theory can also support the idea that laws are a “product of conflict” (Hagan 5). Strain theory is founded on the idea that the goals of a society and the accepted means of achieving said goal causes strain that can

    Read More

  • John Stuart Mill Assisted Suicide Analysis

    1384 Words  | 6 Pages

    In the Harm Principle Mill suggests that the actions of individuals should be limited to prevent the harm of others . An individual may do whatever he or she wants, as long as these actions do not harm others. Mill believes in an individual’s autonomy; being self governed. We can live as we wish, and therefor also die as and when we wish. As Mill says: “the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.

    Read More

  • Professor Ronald Dworkin's The Model Of Rules

    1406 Words  | 6 Pages

    In his essay The Model of Rules I, Professor Ronald Dworkin argues against a certain theory of law he attributes to H.L.A Hart called “positivism.” While Dworkin argues against many tenets of the positivist theory, I will focus this essay on critical reasons against Dworkin’s argument against the legal positivist thesis that the law consist of nothing but rules. To do so, I will explain the necessary components of Hart’s theory of law required to understand Dworkin’s rebuttal. Then, I will reconstruct Dworkin’s argument against what I will classify “nothing but rules” claim, and I will ultimate claim Dworkin’s argument fails because his premise that states principles are extra-legal and cannot be explained as part of the categories is false. In particular, I indicate how principles can be legally binding like legal rules are, and I pick apart his reasons for believing that there are clear distinctions between laws and principles.

    Read More

  • Checks And Balances In John Locke's Declaration Of Independence

    752 Words  | 4 Pages

    Even Cesare Beccaria argues the idea that laws preserve society, and rightfully so, because we need laws to help society improve, flourish, and set what is right and

    Read More

  • Summary Of The Canadian Supreme Court Case Of R. V. Smith

    1471 Words  | 6 Pages

    The Canadian Supreme Court case R. v. Smith (2015 SCC 34) involves the accused, Owen Smith, not only producing edible and medical marijuana products but also selling it as well. Marijuana is prohibited under the Controlled Drugs and Substance Act with the exemption of medical marijuana in its dried form. Smith supplied medical marijuana derivatives that were not dried, such as cookies and ointments. In addition, Smith violated the Marijuana Medical Access Regulations, which restrict legalized possession of medical marijuana to dried marijuana. He was charged with possession and possession for purpose of trafficking.

    Read More

  • Table Rituals By Laurie Tarkan

    944 Words  | 4 Pages

    The establishment of law and order far and wide across the United States, was for one main reason: to maintain the peace and order of this country. Laws are designed to keep us safe not only from each other but from the government as well. It is very important that the laws be followed by each and every individual in society, in order to insure maximum efficiency and security, this however is nearly impossible, due to the variable of human behavior. Laws are designed in the manner to protect from human action or otherwise known (or speculated) natural results. It is a simple way of avoiding cause in order to not deal with the effect of an action.

    Read More

  • Ben Robert-Smith's Argument Analysis

    138 Words  | 1 Pages

    In Ben Robert-Smith’s opinion piece published in the Herald Sun on the 16th of January, 2017 “We Are One but We Are Many”, Robert- Smith addresses he Addresses the Australian public with the argument that is changing the date of Australia day from January 26th. He argues that the date should remain the same but should be undertaken in a manner that is “inclusive and respectful” of other Australian’s interpretation of the day. Comparatively, in Kevin V. Russell’s Letter to the Editor he presents the argument from an alternate perspective.

    Read More

More about Thaler And Sunstein's Argument Analysis

Open Document