This paper attempts to provide a critical evaluation of “behaviorally informed paternalism” as exemplified in the arguments contained in Sarah Conly’s “Against Autonomy”. Recent developments in cognitive psychology have questioned whether a given agent is sufficiently capable of managing her own wellbeing. Conly argues for a hard version of legal paternalism, which implies coercion and overrides autonomy in the name of promoting the wellbeing or interests of those being governed. We examine the core argument of coercive paternalism through the perspectives of John Stuart Mill’s “On Liberty” and ‘libertarian paternalism’. We find the central argument for coercive paternalism wanting and argue for the preservation of the intrinsic value of decision rights contained in the doctrine of the ‘nudge’.
|Uddannelser||Filosofi og Videnskabsteori, (Bachelor/kandidatuddannelse) Bachelor el. kandidat|
|Udgivelsesdato||8 jan. 2015|
|Vejledere||Thomas Søbirk Petersen|
- behavioral law