ipl-logo

State Neutrality And State Paternalism Analysis

1065 Words5 Pages

Rogelio Adlawan, Jr. PHILO 322 (5:50P-6:50P MWF) 4 September 2015 1) The Debate on State Neutrality and State Paternalism: Context The debate on state neutrality and state paternalism is all about the views on how the government must work for its citizens, that is, how to show equal concern for the interests of its citizens. a. State Neutrality or also known as State Anti-Perfectionism State neutrality or also known as state anti-perfectionism believes that self-determination, that is, the ability to pursue one’s conception of the good life, is the only way to respect people fully. To deprive them of self-determination is to consider them as mentally incapable, that is, unable to rationally fend for oneself. However, this does not mean that …show more content…

It believes that government must intervene on the lives of others for their own good, helping humans achieve their idea of the good life. The intervention is likened to a beneficent father (acting in accord with his conception of the interests of his children); making decisions relating to his children’s welfare, rather than letting them make their own decisions, essentially overriding our autonomy. 2) The Debate on State Neutrality and State Paternalism: Stance on the Subject Bearing in mind the debate between state neutrality and state paternalism and in weighing the stance of both sides, justifications and all, I would stand on the side of state paternalism as a better way for government to work for its citizens. a. Paternalism as a Social Insurance Policy In this position paper, I treat paternalism as a form of social insurance policy fully rational persons would take in order to protect themselves; those whose autonomy is curtailed would consent were it not for their compromised condition. The stance considers human tendency for irrationality in weighing conflicting values, deficiencies in cognitive and emotional capacities, and avoidable and unavoidable …show more content…

Self-Protection Principle The state governing in a civilized society is necessary to protect people from harm. It may interfere with individual liberty when harm is likely to result to others from our actions. 2. Harm Principle While the state may intervene against harm likely to occur to others, it may not interfere with self-regarding action. It may not interfere with individuals for their own good, because it will make them happier, or because they are imprudent or wrong. 3. Liberty Principle Individuals may do whatever they desire to do so long as they are not harming others. Over themselves, over their own bodies and minds, individuals are sovereign. This principle states the harm principle from the individual perspective. Neither the government nor other individuals should intervene to prevent an individual’s doing what he or she wants to do. c. State neutrality is simply the idea that there is no public ranking of the value of the different ways of life. “Neutrality” as endorsed by liberals is limited in scope to (justice-respecting) conceptions of the

Show More
Related
485 Words | 2 Pages

Viewpoint neutrality/reasonableness: (1) Illinois excluded the subject of abortion from its specialty plate program. (2) Illinois has not favored one viewpoint over another on the subject of abortion. Instead, the State has restricted access to the specialty plate forum on the basis of the content of the proposed plate - no abortion-related specialty plates, period. ii. (TEST APPLIED to see if government or private speech): Under all the circumstances, would a reasonable person consider the speaker to be the government or a private party?

Read More
742 Words | 3 Pages

The federal government and the states work side-by-side. Each have different powers and responsibilities in the government. Both are necessary for federalism. Since the beginning the two forms of government have been in a never-ending quarrel over uneven power balances. Through the years it has shown many power shifts, gains and losses, but the federal government always comes out on top.

Read More
932 Words | 4 Pages

This document (the Federalist) will provide all the reasons to support the new plan of government described in the U.S. Constitution, and responses to each of the criticisms of the plan. Opponents to the new plan criticize it most on it creating a strong central government that will be abusive to individual liberty. However, an energetic government is crucial to the protection of individual liberty. The plan of government under the Articles of Confederation was unable to effectively protect individual liberties because it did not act directly upon the people, and had no authority to enforce its laws.

Read More
234 Words | 1 Pages

Humans have inherent rights to their life, given to them by god. The liberty given to them is to help utilize the

Read More
807 Words | 4 Pages

The government “guarantees the nurture, education, and comfortable maintenance of every citizen from the cradle to the grave” (Bellamy 30). It is an organization founded on essential mutual dependence, in which the state provides and ensures the safety and security of all of its

Read More
866 Words | 4 Pages

The vast power of the federal government has been on the rise, crippling the state’s authority. In the early 1800’s there have been cases where the Supreme Court has ruled, for the most part, in the federal government’s benefit. With the Legislative and Judicial Branches making up 2/3 of the federal government’s power, many could speculate the two powers are working to strengthen the federal government. However, the ruling was based off of Necessary and Proper Clause, where it is said that Congress (Legislative Branch) has the authority “to find the great powers, to lay and collect taxes; to borrow money; to regulate commerce; and to declare and conduct a war.” When the states interfere it causes the Judicial Branch to step in and decide what

Read More
724 Words | 3 Pages

The government which impacts Equality’s society, is similar to a fascist authority, as it prohibits individualism and the regime has complete control

Read More
1493 Words | 6 Pages

10. Who does what to expand federal framework and regulate public spending? Ever since the drafting of the Constitution, Americans have searched for a balance of responsibilities between the states and the national government, in an effort to create a stronger Union. Recently, Americans have become skeptical of the government; as a result, Americans are more inclined to give greater responsibilities to the states.

Read More
809 Words | 4 Pages

This principle was based off of John Locke's idea of natural rights. For example, for example, one of the individual rights that each citizen of the United States has, is life. This is something that cannot be taken away. Natural rights and individual rights are very similar in terms of what their purpose is. When natural rights were put into place, they served as a way to let citizens get some of their rights back from the king.

Read More
599 Words | 3 Pages

The result is unappealing for a normative account of human rights, as both the rights and the obligations become “special, not universal” (431). However, O'Neill identifies the “deepest problem” to be that the obligations attributed to states are second-order, namely to “secure” the respect of liberty rights and “ensure” the fulfilment of rights to goods and services (433). The issue is that first-order obligations are the counterparts of the rights described instead (434). She argues that the state relegates first-order obligations to individuals, who become the “beneficiaries” of obligations while bearing their “burden” (436). Ultimately, she voices concern that overburdening 'the farmer and the physician' may diminish both their willingness of provide their respective services and the quality of their labour

Read More
832 Words | 4 Pages

By explicitly listing the different elements of civil interest, Locke sets relatively clear boundaries for government control. Additionally, Locke places far greater emphasis on the government leader’s responsibility to the people than Mussolini. Locke also states that “God certainly appointed government to restrain the partiality and violence of men” (pg. 86). The leader’s responsibility to the people further indicates Locke’s belief that government should exist to serve the people and to minimize negative human actions. The conflict between the Fascist regime in Fatherland and Locke’s political theory is the involvement government should have with its

Read More
701 Words | 3 Pages

Similarly, he argues that 1. To exercise autonomy and freedom one must use reasoning and moral judgment. 2. The state has an obligation to protect the freedom and promote the autonomy of individuals. 3.

Read More
1184 Words | 5 Pages

Government intervention in private affairs refers to regulatory actions taken by a government in order to affect or interfere with decisions made by individuals. First of all, I agree with the statement that government intervention in private affairs is always undesirable. Firstly, many consider it as an intrusion into personal choice as the government tries to intervene into private affairs. Besides that, people consider it to be a human rights violation. However, there are still positive sides to government intervention and this essay aims to examine whether government intervention in private affairs is always undesirable.

Read More
1627 Words | 7 Pages

Freedom is the right to do what you want, is right to live where you want, is right to choose the religion that you want and freedom is right to eat, learn, drink what you want. There is one thing that limits our freedom: someone else’s freedom. According to a Boğaziçi University student Arda Seyhan, “We can live free by respecting other people’s freedom. We are living in a community which we all need people around us, we can not just ignore other’s freedom and do what we want to do for our freedom.” We should consider other people's rights.

Read More
716 Words | 3 Pages

There is a contention between what people need and what serves their interests and what is required for the welfare, wellbeing and security of the whole gathering. Government needs to direct that contention. Contingent upon the kind of view that is agent concerning the idea of the social course of action and the idea of government, the contention will be settled for either sets of interests Furthermore, we need to debate the question whether self-interest has gained the upper hand in recent times, whether there is a tendency away from the common good towards self-interest and even more problematically: egoism (i.e., distinction between self-interest and egoism), whether there is a primacy of self-interest in our economic system, and whether we are living in an era of self-interest, in a self-society or within an utilitarian regime? Finally, is there a change in values and a ‘trans-valuation of values’ (Nietzsche) in our

Read More

More about State Neutrality And State Paternalism Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document