4.14.09Public Policy 240Jeff Summerlin-Long

Why are we talking about liberty again? Because this time we are trying to focus on

some specific ethical complications that arise from government intervention in liberty.

And because it’s important. Mill: the purpose of government is to

maximize the attainment of individual liberty. Why? Because it stimulate creativity, which in turn stimulates progress. (G&T, p. 2)

The ability to do as one desires . . . . Individual– generally excludes

anyone incapable of making a “rational” decision. Examples: kids, insane, barbarians

Remember we’re talking about when it’s ok for the government to infringe on an individual’s liberty.

Negative concept of liberty:absence of restraint

Positive concept of liberty:availability of meaningful Sir Isaiah Berlin choice and capacity 1909 – 1997

to exercise it

Nozick and Libertarianism Friedman – economic (free market)

liberty Rawls: 2nd Principle – “Each person

to have equal right to the most extensive basic liberties compatible with similar liberties for others”. Says we must take liberties as a total system, not individually. Liberties may be balanced.

Harm to Others: but what types of harm count? Does the harm inflicted have to be intentional? Mill: “must be calculated to produce evil to some one else.” p. 186.

Compulsion to act to benefit others (taxes, jury duty, military service). A person is equally responsible for action and inaction, though inaction is the “exception to the rule” whereas action is the rule.

Psychological HarmsEthical Harms: when do social ethics

trump individual ethics? Should they ever?

Two Major Categories:1)Paternalism2)Moralism

Definition: “legislate on the basis of individual welfare in the absence of individual consent.” G& T, p. 1. Akin to Parental Authority to make kids do what is in their long-term interest.

Major Question: When is it ethical for the government to compel action or inaction for the “good” of the actor?

Institutions:1)Elitism and Democracy– small group of

people making decisions for everyone else versus a large group of people making a decision for everyone else.

2)Supreme Court– body of selected people who may overturn an elected, representative body.

• Policies:1)Seat Belt and Helmet Laws2)Food Stamps and other In-Kind benefits

This is a different question.Mill’s exceptions to the rule:1)Person is impaired in some way;2)Intervention is minimal; and3)A person would normally want the

intervention.• Bridge Example

HARM TO SELF? HARM TO OTHERS?

Definition: “legislate on the basis of social morality in the absence of individual harm.” G&T, p. 1.

“Moralists” argue that the immorality of an action trumps any infringement on liberty

No question that this happens. The question is: Should it happen?

Institutions: really, moral ideas permeate every governmental institution because they are staffed by people.

Policies:1)Liquor Sales Before Noon on Sundays;2)Anti-Sodomy Statutes;3)Regulation of Public Nudity. Since we do

regulate it, and most people accept it, G&T say it “strains” Mill’s argument. Is this true?

GOOD QUESTION OH, I SEE NOW.

“IMMORAL SELF-EXPRESSION”

MORAL SELF-EXPRESSION?

Liberty and Competition: What do we do in a zero-sum situation?

Liberty and Education: What do we do if education doesn’t “work”?

Liberty and Power (Governance): Whose liberty do we care about the most? B. 98.

Risk of interfering wrongly may outweigh risk of allowing behavior to continue. P. 202.

Social Exclusion– the fear of ostracism as way to prevent behavior;

Education– giving people all the information and hoping that they make the “right” decision.

Mockery– always fun. Gutman and Thompson say the liberty

of “deliberative democracy” allows the use of paternalism and moralism as bases for policy. What does this mean?