Paternalism

Paternalism

Paternalism:
What is paternalism? According to Kojien, paternalism is the idea that, for the benefit of another person, one should interfere with and restrict the other person's life and actions, regardless of the person's wishes. Simply put, it means interfering with and restricting the actions of others "for your own sake."

Should we have complete freedom to do what we want or have certain freedoms restricted for our own good?

1)
Paternalism is the interference by a state or individual with another person against their will, defended or motivated by the claim that the person being interfered with will be better off or protected from harm.

2)
The issue of paternalism arises about legal restrictions, such as anti-drug legislation, the requirement to wear seat belts, and, in medical contexts, doctors withholding relevant information about a patient's condition. Theoretically, it raises questions about how people should be treated when they are not entirely rational.

3)
1. Introduction
The government requires people to pay into a pension scheme (social security). It requires motorcyclists to wear helmets. It forbids people from swimming on a public beach unless lifeguards are present. 

It bans the sale of various drugs that are considered to be ineffective and prohibits the sale of multiple medicines deemed to be harmful. It does not allow consent to certain forms of assault to be used as a defence against prosecution for that assault.

4)
Civil law does not allow the enforcement of certain types of contracts, such as gambling debts. It requires minors to have blood transfusions even if their religious beliefs forbid it. People can be civilly committed if they are a danger to themselves.

Doctors do not tell patients the truth about their medical condition. A doctor may say to the wife of a man whose car went off a bridge into the water and drowned that he died instantly, when in fact, he died a rather gruesome death.

5)
A husband may hide sleeping pills from a depressed wife. A philosophy department may require a student to take logic courses.

A teacher may be less than honest in telling a student he has little philosophical ability.

6)
All these rules, policies, and actions may be made for different reasons; other considerations may justify them. 

If they are justified solely because the person concerned would be better off or less harmed by the rule, policy, etc., and the person concerned would prefer not to be treated this way, we have an instance of paternalism.

7)
As the examples show, the question of paternalism arises in many different areas of our personal and public lives. As such, it is an essential area of applied ethics. 

But it also raises specific theoretical questions. Perhaps the most crucial question is: What powers is it legitimate for a state, both coercive and incentivising, to have? 

8)
It also raises questions about how individuals should relate to each other, whether in an institutional or a purely personal setting. How should we think about individual autonomy and its limits? 

What does it mean to respect the personhood of others? What is the trade-off, if any, between concern for the welfare of others and respect for their right to make their own decisions?

9)
This paper examines some of the conceptual issues in analysing paternalism and then discusses the normative issues concerning the legitimacy of paternalism by the state and various civil institutions.

//Postscript//

I don't think we are looking for complete freedom.
We can make appropriate choices within certain limits, such as being safe and beneficial.
However, when there are infinite possibilities and completely free choices, we may be unable to decide what to choose.

However, if the state or government induces a choice or creates a situation where we are forced to choose a malicious outcome, it will be to our disadvantage.

It is a situation to avoid even if you are not explicitly deceiving or threatening.

Paternalism
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/paternalism/

Paternalism
https://www.britannica.com/place/Belgian-Congo

Paternalism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternalism

Add info)

Paternalism - Wikipedia
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%91%E3%82%BF%E3%83%BC%E3%83%8A%E3%83%AA%E3%82%BA%E3 %83%A0

Paternalism is when someone in a powerful position intervenes, interferes or supports someone in a weaker position, regardless of their wishes.

Some employment systems do not immediately dismiss workers even if they are found to be incompetent or inferior, and companies that use seniority systems determine promotions and salaries based on length of employment rather than results. This type of management is called "management paternalism" and "management familyism".

The relationship between doctor and patient is asymmetric, between provider and recipient. In the past, paternalism was seen as protecting the patient's interests (survival and health). The doctor interfered with the patient's freedom and rights. There was a tendency to take it for granted that restrictions would be placed on people, and the violation of the right to self-determination became a problem. This is because the well-being of a patient is not a matter for the doctor to decide. However, interference with minors, including young children, people with an addiction, and people who are self-harming or violent, is often allowed under the system.

House of Cards Season 1 Digest - Netflix [H.D.]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbXsWa3NEM0

Unique program "Kan Ito-sensei appears!" Part 1: Confusion in American politics, flaws in the political ideology of democracy" Guest: International political analyst Mr. Kan Ito

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUPANdUBvUA&t=3288s

A)
Christianity's heaven is supposed to be in heaven, but in the U.S., Christianity creates and parades a Christian heaven on earth.
The other is the traditional Anglo-Saxon political culture since the Magna Carta and the two foundations of value judgment that created America. Christianity, especially Protestantism, which was the sharpest and most extreme, and Anglo-Saxon political culture are the two ideologies that created America in the first place.

B)
In the following 18th century, influenced to some extent by the so-called Enlightenment ideas of England and France, Americans also came to support French ideas about human rights, especially in the second half of the 18th century.
The principles in America's Declaration of Independence and France's Universal Declaration of Human Rights are similar.

Until the 1950s, America was dominated by these three value judgments: the American Revolution, radical ideas of Christianity, Anglo-Saxon political culture, and the Enlightenment of the late 18th century. Or, America maintained an influential Anglo-Saxon political culture and Christianity.

C)
From the 1960s onwards, these two value judgments began to collapse visibly.
American politicians and commentators pretended to believe in Christian values, even if they did not believe in Christianity.

But in the last 60 years since 1960, they have changed their minds and now think that it is better to do what they are doing, which is the opposite of Christian value judgments, and that it is progressive and rational.

From a Christian point of view, there is materialism, which is undesirable in the first place, or economic profit, and there is hedonism, which means taking the plunge and enjoying the pleasures you want while you are alive. It has become the best thing in their life.

D)
This is unacceptable as an original Christian idea.
Creating such a pleasure-oriented lifestyle has become the most beautiful thing.

Sexual behaviour and sexual relationships have become so-called sexual liberation, and the number of divorces has increased.
I think the idea that became their basis was in the 1950s when a sociologist named Maslow said that of the three stages of desire, the top one is self-actualisation, and it is essential to understand what you want to do. 

They think it's good to live a life that suits you.
They think the most important thing for a human being is to fulfil his values and desires, so the best way for a human being to live is to satisfy them.

E)
But this is something that Christians will never accept.
They say that the most essential thing in life is self-sufficiency and self-realisation.
I also say that everyone must have high self-esteem.
We are such a fantastic person.
But it seems that that's narcissism.
They say the most honest way to live is to face up to your desires and try to fulfil them.

F)
The Christian value system that was supposed to be the foundation of the United States is also similar to the Anglo-Saxon idea of finding a compromise in cases of conflict and conducting politics in a way that does not damage each other's interests too much. Even this idea has become obsolete.

At the same time, to eliminate feminism and racial discrimination, the government intervenes and increases the number of ethnic minorities and women, giving them priority over white men.

G)
Ultimately, it has become the best way to prioritise and pursue one's interests, manage one's interests successfully, and increase one's status and income.
There is no common standard for moral judgment, and it has become natural that there is no common standard for moral judgment.

Political correctness seems to mean having an awakened or high level of consciousness. Still, ethnic minorities and women tend to use political correctness or Woke-ism, especially white men and Asians. It means that we have to be highly aware of racial and social discrimination and injustice.

H)
Ultimately, politics and human relations within a company and personnel issues become political battles.
By putting the other party in such a disadvantageous position, we need diversity, equality, inclusion, and diversity of those with and without abilities.

Political relations become extremely tense, and the person who makes the loudest noise or complains the most wins.

Unique program "Kan Ito-sensei appears!" Part 2: The post-Cold War post-Cold War U.S. military foreign policy fiasco and future changes in the international political structure" Guest: International political analyst Mr Kan Ito

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh8-JFSx7So&t=48s