How Not to Argue Against Paternalism (Report‪)‬

1. Introduction Paternalism "is the theory or principle that recognizes the need to prevent self-inflicted harm as a legitimizing reason for coercive legislation." (1) Many liberal theorists have strongly antipaternalistic intuitions, some to the point where they believe the state should play no role in protecting people for their own good, that is, the state should play no role in protecting persons from their voluntarily assumed self-harmful actions. This is not to say intuitions are all liberal opponents have to offer--this essay will examine three (unsuccessful) strategies for delivering a principled argument against paternalism. The aim of this essay is primarily negative. I will not attempt to canvass why liberalism might require principled opposition by way of outlining a more promising set of arguments against paternalism.