ABSTRACT
This chapter explicates freedom from harm. It presents the case for its being the basic value of liberalism. The chapter compares it to other conceptions of freedom, including Philip Pettit's neo-republican freedom as non-domination and a new competitor Christian List and Laura Valentini call freedom as independence. It briefly considers some objections, including the claim that equality is more central to liberalism than freedom. Protecting freedom from harm makes that possible more than does the protection of any more specific form of freedom. A liberalism that protects freedom from harm is more neutral than autonomist liberalism. Freedom as non-domination and freedom from harm are types of negative freedom—freedom from interference by others. Freedom from harm is freedom only from interferences that are harmful— i.e., wrongful setbacks to interests. The chapter concludes that freedom from harm compares favorably to freedom as non-domination.
