Abstract

“No, dear, you must not eat the soap; it’s not good for you.” Well-intentioned interference frustrates our desires even in the happiest childhood. Less happy is the perpetual state of adolescent rebellion against apparently arbitrary and unreasonable curtailments of one’s freedom, too frequently justified by the familiar refrain “It’s for your own good” adding insult to injury. Such interference does not necessarily cease with the eagerly awaited entry into adulthood. Not only parents are guilty of it; the state also engages in such interference. Can paternalism where one person deliberately interferes with another for the latter’s own good be morally justified?