Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 08:04:46 -0600 From: Lisa Rogers <EQDOMAIN.EQWQ.LROGERS-AT-email.state.ut.us> Subject: Re: interests -Reply -Reply Justin: As a parent,> I take a very paternalist attitude towards my kids. When I was a teacher I> was moderately paternalist towards mny students, though less so than many> of my colleagues. As a society many people support various paternalist> policies, e.g., about drug use. Paternalism ought to be regarded with some> suspicion. But it isn;t false by definition. ... As to other grounds for> nonpaternalis, how about my suggestion that choice and the freedom to make> mistakes is a fundamental human interest which should be overriden only> with great caution? > > --Justin Schwartz > Sounds good, and very Millian, to me. Of course the paternalists think that just choice as such isn't valuable -- it's choice based on reasons that's valuable. But then if the reasons on which one bases one's choice are mistaken... John Walker My right to choose certainly seems valuable to me! And how shall we decide whose and which choices are mistaken? John, please explain. Justin's point about freedom is where I'd like to see the conversation go. My individual right to do what I like [without hurting others] is very important to me. But we should distinguish between appropriate care-taking and inappropriate. It is not paternalism or maternalism, but parental responsibility to do what is right for one's children, although even here their will and consent is desirable, but parents must often override or veto the "popular" vote. Similarly for students. The instructor's choice of homework need not bear much relation to student preferences, especially when students have other choices. BUT when it comes to somebody protecting me from myself, that's another matter. I should not drive while intoxicated, because that endangers OTHER people. But intoxication of any kind in the privacy of my own home? etc... If you care about government intrusion upon individual, personal, bodily rights and freedoms, I recommend a book called "Ain't nobody's business if you do - the absurdity of consensual crimes". For me, these rights do not include the "freedom" to exploit labor and make profit in every legal way while also writing laws to make legal every possible way to increase profits, although I have seen many a Republican imply or explicitly state just that. I guess that's one of the things that makes me a socialist. Lisa Rogers UUtah --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005