Furthering his ideas, instead of focusing on all of the claims made by Mill’s Harm Principle, Dworkin decided to specify the fact that paternalism is never justified via the good it may do for an individual. Dworkin used two strategies in order to acknowledge ways in which paternalism may be justified otherwise. The first strategy he demonstrated by focusing on instances in which paternalism is justified. The second strategy he demonstrated by defining the circumstances in which paternalism seemed to be justified. It was through these strategies that Dworkin comes up with the example of Odysseus and the Mast, effectively illustrating both of his semi-juxtaposing statements. Paternalism therefore according to Dworkin is justified, but only in very limited
Furthering his ideas, instead of focusing on all of the claims made by Mill’s Harm Principle, Dworkin decided to specify the fact that paternalism is never justified via the good it may do for an individual. Dworkin used two strategies in order to acknowledge ways in which paternalism may be justified otherwise. The first strategy he demonstrated by focusing on instances in which paternalism is justified. The second strategy he demonstrated by defining the circumstances in which paternalism seemed to be justified. It was through these strategies that Dworkin comes up with the example of Odysseus and the Mast, effectively illustrating both of his semi-juxtaposing statements. Paternalism therefore according to Dworkin is justified, but only in very limited