The aims of the thesis The overall aim of this thesis is to examine the conceptual and justificatory issues of paternalism both from a theoretical and practical perspective. My hypothesis is that traditional autonomy-based eutanasia suisse anti aging fail to provide an adequate moral rule to regulate paternalism. I will attribute this failure to a number of different factors. I argue, among others, that a traditional justifications use essentially contested notions such as autonomy, voluntariness or consent; b tend to overemphasize autonomy and underemphasize other values; c attribute value to autonomy on a contingent basis i.
Beginning with the age of the Enlightenment, paternalism came increasingly to the forefront of philosophical attention.
Ever since this period, the dilemma of regulating self-harming behavior has occupied the mind of many moral and legal philosophers. For the past two centuries, the discourse has been dominated by the harm principle of John Stuart Mill.
How come then that paternalism still raises so many theoretical controversies and generates so much debate in public discourse?
Obviously, the harm principle is far from being an uncontested formula. It is an essentially liberal precept that has been subjected to numerous criticisms, mainly because its radical prohibition of paternalism seems untenable in modern societies.
There are several cases when paternalism is not only unobjectionable, but expressly necessary. The existence of these competing theories partly explains the controversial character of paternalism, especially when we take into account that the debates over paternalism are heavily laden with moral and political presuppositions.
These often preclude the possibility of rational discussion. However, there is a deeper problem that contributes to the controversial nature of paternalism, independent of political orientation or personal moral convictions.
It is related to any theory that strives to give a comprehensive rule for paternalism. The method and relevance of the research II. It has generated an immense amount of literature and articles still keep popping up regularly until this day.
The theoretical discourse continues with changing intensity. New scientific trends place the topic into new perspectives.
Newly emerging ethical theories, such as the ethics of care, demand the re-examination of previous justificatory models based on traditional ethical approaches. The protection from self-harming behavior is not only a persistent theoretical question but also a fact of life that emerges in new and complex forms with the increasing multicultural and pluralistic nature of modern societies.
Technological advancement also creates new moral dilemmas with paternalistic implications e. Consequently, paternalism is a highly relevant issue nowadays.
Section of applied sciences
A more personal reason for my research is the paternalistic attitude that permeates Hungarian politics and Hungarian society. The heritage of socialism persists until today, mainly in the form of extensive welfare regulations. The approach of my thesis is predominantly theoretical. There is a huge variety of philosophical arguments and justificatory theories related to paternalism.
I primarily conceive paternalism as an ethical dilemma. Although it often becomes a legal issue in the form of paternalistic regulations and related cases, there are questions of paternalism that never enter the field of law.
If the paternalistic actor is not the state e. Additionally, it seems that paternalistic legal regulations and decisions are mostly backed up by ethical arguments and the outcome of those decisions depends on the balancing of eutanasia suisse anti aging arguments. In the light of this, it is no surprise that paternalistic cases most often appear at the level of constitutional adjudication. Paternalistic intervention can be conceived as the collision of svájci bőrápoló anti aging módszer fundamental rights e.
This deductivist model functions well in simple cases that can be brought directly and unambiguously under one specific moral principle.
Unfortunately, paternalistic cases are not so easy to decide because the abstract rules regulating paternalism are indeterminate and there are often conflicting ethical principles that require careful balancing.
Two problems render the top-down model inoperable here. The first one is related to the abstract character of the rule i. B The bottom-up strategy of justification is an inductivist method which claims that paradigmatic cases and particular judgments allow us to draw moral conclusions independently of general norms.
This model is comparable to the precedent-system of the common law.
In chapter 4, I advocate a contextual and case-based justification for paternalism. The way I use cases in the thesis will reflect this approach: I aim to show how moral intuitions and moral principles clash in hard cases of paternalism. The method of my theoretical investigation is mainly analytical. As it will become apparent from the beginning of the thesis, the negative connotations of paternalism are the results of modernity and the Age of Enlightenment.
The scope of my research is limited to the examination of paternalistic moral dilemmas and their representation in the case-law of the Hungarian Constitutional Court eutanasia suisse anti aging the European Court of Human Rights. I am not going to give a comprehensive empirical overview of paternalistic legal regulations, partly because it is irrelevant for my theoretical investigation, and also because it seems impossible to examine all laws and judicial decisions related to the issue.
Old Assyrian Trade with Anatolia in the 20th Century BCE
The notion of paternalism is extremely wide, especially when benefit-promoting forms are also taken into consideration. In a certain sense, all forms of welfare regulations and institutions, from public education to health insurance policies, can be considered as paternalistic interventions.
My work is particular and comprehensive at the same time. It is particular in the sense that it focuses only on one liberty-limiting principle and it is comprehensive because it tries to place paternalism into the wider context of ethics and political philosophy. To understand paternalism is to understand the underlying ethical and political theories.