ABSTRACT
The liberal view on paternalism can be challenged from two diametrically opposed directions. On the one hand, an anarchist or libertarian case could be made stating that restrictions on an agent’s freedom should not be allowed even if her decisions are impaired, and even if she will otherwise inflict harm on herself. All constraining control, the weak forms of paternalism included, should according to this view be condemned as indications of, or steps towards, oppressive totalitarianism. On the other hand, the contrary claim could be made stating that liberal policies are too permissive, and that utility, morality or rationality demand more active interference in the affairs of individual human beings. According to this latter view, references to oppression and totalitarianism simply disguise immoral and negligent attitudes towards one’s fellow creatures.
