Paternalism

Last updated
Child wearing a child harness Mallpicture.jpg
Child wearing a child harness

Paternalism is action that limits a person's or group's liberty or autonomy and is intended to promote their own good. [1] Paternalism can also imply that the behavior is against or regardless of the will of a person, or also that the behavior expresses an attitude of superiority. [2] Paternalism, paternalistic and paternalist have all been used as a pejorative for example in the context of societal and/or political realms and references. [1]

Contents

Some such as John Stuart Mill think paternalism can be appropriate towards children, saying:

"It is, perhaps, hardly necessary to say that this doctrine is meant to apply only to human beings in the maturity of their faculties. We are not speaking of children, or of young persons below the age which the law may fix as that of manhood or womanhood." [3]

Paternalism towards adults is sometimes thought of as treating them as if they were children. [4]

Etymology

The word paternalism derives from the adjective paternal, which entered the English language in the 15th century from Old French paternel (cf. Old Occitan paternal, as in Catalan, Spanish and Portuguese), itself from Medieval Latin paternalis. [5] The classical Latin equivalent was paternus "fatherly", from pater "father". [6]

Types

Soft and hard

Soft paternalism is the view that paternalism is justified only if an action to be committed is involuntary. John Stuart Mill gives the example of a person about to walk across a damaged bridge. One cannot tell the person the bridge is damaged as he does not speak our language. According to soft paternalism, one would be justified in forcing him to not cross the bridge so one could find out whether he knows about the damage. If he knows and wants to jump off the bridge and commit suicide then one should allow him to. Hard paternalists say that at least sometimes one is entitled to prevent him from crossing the bridge and committing suicide. [1] [ clarification needed ]

Pure and impure

Pure paternalism is paternalism where the person(s) having their liberty or autonomy taken away are those being protected. Impure paternalism occurs when the class of people whose liberty or autonomy is violated by some measure is wider than the group of persons thereby protected. [1]

Moral and welfare

Moral paternalism is where paternalism is justified to promote the moral well-being of a person(s) even if their welfare would not improve. For example, it could be argued that someone should be prevented from prostitution even if they make a decent living off it and their health is protected. A moral paternalist would argue that it is ethical considering they believe prostitution to be morally corrupting. [1]

Criteria for effective paternalism

Thomas Pogge argues that there are a number of criteria for paternalism. [7]

Opponents

In his Two Treatises of Government , John Locke argues (against Robert Filmer) that political and paternal power are not the same.

John Stuart Mill opposes state paternalism on the grounds that individuals know their own good better than the state does, that the moral equality of persons demands respect for others' liberty, and that paternalism disrupts the development of an independent character. In On Liberty , he writes:

[T]he only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant. He cannot rightfully be compelled to do or forbear because it will be better for him to do so, because it will make him happier, because, in the opinion of others, to do so would be wise, or even right. [3] :14

Mill, however, disregards his own analysis when it comes to colonial subjects. In On Liberty, he writes:

Those who are still in a state to require being taken care of by others, must be protected against their own actions as well as against external injury. For the same reason, we may leave out of consideration those backward states of society in which the race itself may be considered as in its nonage. The early difficulties in the way of spontaneous progress are so great, that there is seldom any choice of means for overcoming them; and a ruler full of the spirit of improvement is warranted in the use of any expedients that will attain an end, perhaps otherwise unattainable. Despotism is a legitimate mode of government in dealing with barbarians, provided the end be their improvement, and the means justified by actually effecting that end.

Mill above declares barbarians to be in need of paternalism. But he narrowly defines barbarism historically, geographically, and economically insofar as to declare it fit to describe the people he intends to describe as such.

Contemporary opponents of paternalism often appeal to the ideal of personal autonomy.[ citation needed ]

In society

Paternalism and slavery

A concept of paternalism functioned as a tool of justification during the slavery era, and the concept promoted the institution of the slavery. Masters, who were the owners of slaves, believed themselves that the concept of paternalism can justify their wrongdoings such as trading of slaves and punishment of their slaves. The masters believed that they are helping and rescuing slaves from poor conditions; therefore, the masters believed themselves as parent or savior of their slaves. Masters used the concept of paternalism to show that their behavior is not wrong or unethical. Not only by the masters, but slaves also exploited the concept of paternalism for their own benefit. For instance, slaves believed that enslavement would be better than the freedom. Slaves believed that they would be treated better as long as they build good relationship with their masters. Slaves also believed that they could get basic human needs such as food from their masters. Thus, the concept of paternalism for slaves was the tool that made slaves feel more comfortable and free.[ citation needed ] Walter Johnson introduces a concept of paternalism in Soul by Soul: Life Inside the Antebellum Slave Market that mentions "Slave-market paternalism thus replayed the plots of proslavery propaganda and fiction: the good hearted slave at the side of the dying master; the slave who could be trusted to master himself; the slaveholder's saving interventions in the life of the unfortunate slave". [10] Even though slaves could benefit from the concept of paternalism by receiving abundant food and medical care, the concept can never justify the institution of slavery. Some libertarians [ who? ] consider paternalism, especially when imposed by the state to be a form of modern slavery.[ citation needed ]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">John Stuart Mill</span> British philosopher and political economist (1806–1873)

John Stuart Mill was an English philosopher, political economist, politician and civil servant. One of the most influential thinkers in the history of classical liberalism, he contributed widely to social theory, political theory, and political economy. Dubbed "the most influential English-speaking philosopher of the nineteenth century" by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, he conceived of liberty as justifying the freedom of the individual in opposition to unlimited state and social control.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Justice</span> Concept of moral fairness and administration of the law

Justice, in its broadest sense, is the concept that individuals are to be treated in a manner that is equitable and fair.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Wage slavery</span> Dependence on wages or salary

Wage slavery is a term used to criticize exploitation of labor by business, by keeping wages low or stagnant in order to maximize profits. The situation of wage slavery can be loosely defined as a person's dependence on wages for their livelihood, especially when wages are low, treatment and conditions are poor, and there are few chances of upward mobility.

The right of self-defense is the right for people to use reasonable or defensive force, for the purpose of defending one's own life (self-defense) or the lives of others, including, in certain circumstances, the use of deadly force.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Just war theory</span> Doctrine about when a war is ethically just

The just war theory is a doctrine, also referred to as a tradition, of military ethics that aims to ensure that a war is morally justifiable through a series of criteria, all of which must be met for a war to be considered just. It has been studied by military leaders, theologians, ethicists and policymakers. The criteria are split into two groups: jus ad bellum and jus in bello. The first group of criteria concerns the morality of going to war, and the second group of criteria concerns the moral conduct within war. There have been calls for the inclusion of a third category of just war theory dealing with the morality of post-war settlement and reconstruction. The just war theory postulates the belief that war, while it is terrible but less so with the right conduct, is not always the worst option. Important responsibilities, undesirable outcomes, or preventable atrocities may justify war.

The harm principle holds that the actions of individuals should be limited only to prevent harm to other individuals. John Stuart Mill articulated the principle in the 1859 essay On Liberty, where he argued that "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others." An equivalent was earlier stated in France's Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen of 1789 as, "Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else; hence the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society the enjoyment of the same rights. These limits can only be determined by law." It finds earlier expression in Thomas Jefferson's 1785 "Notes on the State of Virginia," Query 17 (Religion) in which he writes, "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others."

<i>On Liberty</i> Book by John Stuart Mill

On Liberty is an essay published in 1859 by the English philosopher John Stuart Mill. It applied Mill's ethical system of utilitarianism to society and state. Mill suggested standards for the relationship between authority and liberty. He emphasized the importance of individuality, which he considered a prerequisite to the higher pleasures—the summum bonum of utilitarianism. Furthermore, Mill asserted that democratic ideals may result in the tyranny of the majority. Among the standards proposed are Mill's three basic liberties of individuals, his three legitimate objections to government intervention, and his two maxims regarding the relationship of the individual to society.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Liberty</span> Creation and experience of societal freedom

Liberty is the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Free Negro</span> Emancipated people of color

In the British colonies in North America and in the United States before the abolition of slavery in 1865, free Negro or free Black described the legal status of African Americans who were not enslaved. The term was applied both to formerly enslaved people (freedmen) and to those who had been born free, whether of African or mixed descent.

Eugene Dominic Genovese was an American historian of the American South and American slavery. He was noted for bringing a Marxist perspective to the study of power, class and relations between planters and slaves in the South. His book Roll, Jordan, Roll: The World the Slaves Made won the Bancroft Prize. He later abandoned the left and Marxism and embraced traditionalist conservatism. He wrote during the Cold War and his political beliefs were viewed by some as highly controversial at the time.

<i>The Subjection of Women</i> 1869 essay by John Stuart Mill

The Subjection of Women is an essay by English philosopher, political economist and civil servant John Stuart Mill published in 1869, with ideas he developed jointly with his wife Harriet Taylor Mill. Mill submitted the finished manuscript of their collaborative work On Liberty (1859) soon after her untimely death in late 1858, and then continued work on The Subjection of Women until its completion in 1861. At the time of its publication, the essay's argument for equality between the sexes was an affront to European conventional norms regarding the status of men and women.

In ethics and other branches of philosophy, suicide poses difficult questions, answered differently by various philosophers. The French Algerian essayist, novelist, and playwright Albert Camus (1913–1960) began his philosophical essay The Myth of Sisyphus with the famous line "There is but one truly serious philosophical problem and that is suicide.".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Proslavery thought</span> Ideology that perceives slavery as a positive good

Proslavery is support for slavery. It is sometimes found in the thought of ancient philosophers, religious texts, and in American and British writings especially before the American Civil War but also later through the 20th century. Arguments in favor of slavery include deference to the Bible and thus to God, some people being natural slaves in need of supervision, slaves often being better off than the poorest non-slaves, practical social benefit for the society as a whole, and slavery being a time-proven practice by multiple great civilizations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Female slavery in the United States</span> Overview of female slavery in the United States of America

The institution of slavery in North America existed from the earliest years of the colonial history of the United States until 1865 when the Thirteenth Amendment abolished slavery throughout the United States except as punishment for a crime. It was also abolished among the sovereign Indian tribes in Indian Territory by new peace treaties which the US required after the Civil War.

<i>The Slave Community</i> 1972 book by John W. Blassingame

The Slave Community: Plantation Life in the Antebellum South is a book written by American historian John W. Blassingame. Published in 1972, it is one of the first historical studies of slavery in the United States to be presented from the perspective of the enslaved. The Slave Community contradicted those historians who had interpreted history to suggest that African-American slaves were docile and submissive "Sambos" who enjoyed the benefits of a paternalistic master–slave relationship on southern plantations. Using psychology, Blassingame analyzes fugitive slave narratives published in the 19th century to conclude that an independent culture developed among the enslaved and that there were a variety of personality types exhibited by slaves.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">The Bible and slavery</span> Slavery in the Bible

The Bible contains many references to slavery, which was a common practice in antiquity. Biblical texts outline sources and the legal status of slaves, economic roles of slavery, types of slavery, and debt slavery, which thoroughly explain the institution of slavery in Israel in antiquity. The Bible stipulates the treatment of slaves, especially in the Old Testament. There are also references to slavery in the New Testament.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Voluntary slavery</span>

Voluntary slavery, in theory, is the condition of slavery entered into at a point of voluntary consent. It is distinguished from involuntary slavery where an individual is forced to a period of servitude usually as punishment for a crime.

The Negro in the South is a book written in 1907 by sociologist W. E. B. Du Bois and educator Booker T. Washington that describes the social history of African-American people in the southern United States. It is a compilation of the William Levi Bull Lectures on Christian Sociology from that year. Washington and Du Bois had recently co-contributed to the Washington-edited 1903 collection The Negro Problem.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Freedom</span> Ability to act or change without constraint

Freedom is the power or right to speak, act and change as one wants without hindrance or restraint. Freedom is often associated with liberty and autonomy in the sense of "giving oneself one's own laws".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Slavery as a positive good in the United States</span> Prevailing view in the Southern US prior to the American Civil War

Slavery as a positive good in the United States was the prevailing view of Southern politicians and intellectuals just before the American Civil War, as opposed to seeing it as a crime against humanity or a necessary evil. They defended the legal enslavement of people for their labor as a benevolent, paternalistic institution with social and economic benefits, an important bulwark of civilization, and a divine institution similar or superior to the free labor in the North.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Dworkin, Gerald (2020). Edward N. Zalta (ed.). Paternalism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  2. Shiffrin, Seana. 2000. "Paternalism, Unconscionability Doctrine, and Accommodation". Philosophy and Public Affairs 29(3): 205–250.
  3. 1 2 Mill, J.S. [1859]/(1991) "On Liberty", published in Gray, John (ed), John Stuart Mill: On Liberty and Other Essays, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  4. Feinberg, Joel. 1986. Harm to Self. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 4[ ISBN missing ]
  5. "Paternal - Adjective". Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press. March 2021. Retrieved 28 April 2021.
  6. "Paternal (adjective)". Online Etymology Dictionary . Retrieved 2023-12-21.
  7. Pogge, Thomas (2008). World poverty and human rights (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity. ISBN   978-0745641430 . Retrieved 9 March 2015.
  8. Mulligan, Erin R. "Paternalism and the Southern Hierarchy: How Slaves Defined Antebellum Southern Women" Archived 2020-03-04 at the Wayback Machine , Armstrong Undergraduate Journal of History 2, no. 2, August 2012.
  9. "The Excuse of Paternalism in the Antebellum South: Ideology or Practice?" (PDF).
  10. Johnson, Walter (February 2000). Soul by Soul: Life Inside the Antebellum Slave Market. Harvard University Press. p. 18. ISBN   978-0674005396.

Further reading