Should Smoking be Banned? J.S Mills Harm Principle

Should Smoking be Banned? J.S Mills Harm Principle Should Smoking Be Banned? Discuss In Relation to J.S Mills Harm Principle Smoking has held a social stigma for many years, yet has generally been protected from being prohibited due to the principle of a freedom to smoke. However, freedom comes in many forms and means different things to different people, and with some concepts of freedom it may be seen that smoking should be banned. This essay will focus on one particular idea of freedom, J.S Mills Harm Principle, and will look in depth at how this relates to smoking. The essay will look at whether smoking should be banned, either partially, as is the case in Britain today or completely. The essay will also look at ideas such as Paternalism and consent and how this relates to J.S Mills Harm Principle and a smoking ban and concludes on whether smoking should be banned. J. S Mills Harm Theory is an idea based on the instrumental value of freedom. Instrumental value of freedom is concerned with the outcome, as opposed with the intrinsic value which is more concerned with freedom itself being fulfilled, the outcome desired usually being one with the most utility. Mills Harm Theory is the principle that a person should be restricted from committing an act that will cause harm. There are however restrictions to this rule. Acts are divided into two categories, other regarding and self regarding. Other regarding cause harm to others, such as assaulting another person, self regarding only harms the actor. Mills argues that only other regarding actions should be prohibited. N. Barry states the only grounds for interfering with an individual is to prevent harm to others; over action that affect only himself the individual is sovereign.1 Thus, under Mills Harm Principle actions that affect only the actor should not be prohibited. Mills did not think that all self-regarding acts are morally indifferent, and the principle supports persuasion against self regarding acts that are deemed immoral, however it is not persuasion, and coercion, that should be used.2 The reasoning behind Mills principle is that he believed in maximum freedom of the person. With regard to expression and thought, Mills Harm Principle does not place the same restrictions he places on actions. Other regarding actions that only cause offence and not injury should not be prohibited, no matter how much offence is caused. Clearly Mills had placed restriction on other regarding actions, as causing injury to others should not be defended in the name of freedom. None the less J. S Mills clearly thought that state authority should be markedly limited so as to leave as much room for liberty.3 The Harm Principle can be applied to the concept of smoking; however there are several interpretations and criticisms of this. Smoking in public is generally seen as an other regarding action as it causes harm to others. Second hand smoke (SHS) contains 4000 toxic chemicals4 and the Smoking in private however is usually seen as a self regarding action as the only harm caused is to the smoker. Thus, following the J. S Mills Harm Principle smoking should be banned in public places, but not banned entirely. The UK government introduced a ban on smoking in all public places in 20075 and this seems like the appropriate action if you were to follow J.S Mills Harm Principle. There are however many criticisms of the Harm Principle that actually suggest a ban on smoking in public places does not go far enough. It can be argued that smoking privately in your own home is not merely a self regarding action. Political theorists, notably James Fitzjames Stephen and Lord Delvin, have argued that there is not such thing as a self regarding action as all actions have some effect on others. Garner summarises this argument stating that there is no such thing as private immortality in the sense that even our private behaviour will have public consequence.6 It seems unlikely that even the most trivial private action would affect society, however there is a strong case that smoking does. Firstly smokers are likely to have their health affected later in life due to their smoking, which could ultimately lead to seriously health problems or death. It is argued that this would cause financial harm, through funeral costs or being left without a financial provider, and emoti onal harm to the smokers family. It is also argued that smokers harm society as tax payer money is spent on providing NHS treatment or social benefits if the smoker is left unable to work due to his habit.7 It can be argued then that smoking privately is not a self regarding action, is in fact an other regarding action, and thus following J.S Mills harm principle should be banned completely. D.D Raphael states however that this objection is not to the principle of Mills position, but to its unreality, its lack of application.8 In theory there are self regarding actions, but in reality they rarely, if at all, exist. Paternalism counters J.S Mills idea that a self regarding act, presuming they exist, should be allowed. Paternalism, with regard to smoking, would argue that the state ought to be concerned with the moral welfare of the individual agent.9 Paternalism would support the state prohibiting smoking in order to protect the individual, and thus would support an absolute ban on smoking. This is the same principle behind that of controlled drugs, of which the consumption is illegal if done so privately. Mill would obviously reject this principle as it goes against what is set out in the Harm Principle. Mill advocated the freedom of action, even if it is self harming as he believed it was both character forming, and humans are the best judge of their actions.10 Professor H. L. A Hart was a keen supporting of the idea that criminal law is to prevent harm to other people however even Hart accepted that the propriety of some paternalistic legislation e.g on the control of drugs.11 Smoking is as h armful clearly harmful to the user, with 25% of smokers dying from the habit12, then surely it is the states responsibility to prohibit the action. This is certainly the paternalistic viewpoint. Goodin makes an interesting point in The Ethics of Smoking. A supporter of Mills may argue Paternalism prohibition of smoking stops the individual from being free. However, if the smoker is trying to quit then by banning smoking completely, we are simply using coercion to enable people to carry out their own goals.13 Consent is an issue that is commonly found when discussing the banning of smoking, and has been used by both pro and anti ban theorist. It may be argued that non-smokers choose to visit public places where smoking is prevalent such as pubs or clubs. The harm they receive then from second hand smoke has been consented to as they choose to visit said public place. This would seem to conclude that smoking in public is only an other regarding action if it has been consented to, and therefore that smoking should be allowed freely in all public places. However, non-smokers if they sought to visit non-smoking pubs and clubs would have very limited choice. Even more importantly individuals who work in areas where smoking is allowed will suffer even greater health risks due to their constant interaction with second hand smoke. Goodin argued that passive smoking generally occurs as unavoidable consequence of being in proximity to smokers and thus they are involuntarily smoking.14 Therefore, it can be argued, there is actually no consent, so this cannot be used as a defence against ban of smoking in public places. If consent is not an argument for allowing smoking in public places, then it is certainly used when countering a complete smoking ban. Anti-Smoking ban individuals state that they have consented to smoking, and thus to the harm itself. Therefore they did not require any paternalistic state intervention. Dworkin summarises this stating the incurring of harm requires the active co-operation of the victim.15 This supports Mills idea that an individual is the best judge of their own actions, and they want to smoke and know the consequences it is their right to do so. However Goodin makes an interesting contradiction. As tobacco is addictive due to chemicals such as nicotine then the individual only consents to the first cigarette, as they cannot help but smoke after this. Goodin argues if the product is truly addictive, then we have no more reason to respect the persons voluntary choice (however well informed) to abandon his future validation to an addiction than we have for respecting a persons voluntary choice (however well informed) to sell himself to slavery.16 There are more practical objections to a complete ban on smoking however. Barry, amongst others, points out a utilitarian view supporting smoking. If smoking was to be banned, and tobacco was to be made an illegal substance society would see many negative consequences. There would be an increase in crime, both of the users and dealers of tobacco, and a gangster culture would develop around tobacco just as it has with controlled goods. As tobacco would be very expensive to (illegally) purchase, crime rates would increase that way as users may commit crime to fund their expensive habit.17 This can easily be related with the criticism of Mills Harm Theory that smoking is not an other regarding action due to its cost to society. If smoking was to be banned completely the increase in crime because of this would have a larger detrimental cost than would be saved through the decrease in NHS and social spending. The question remains, should smoking be banned? Strictly following the Harm Principle it would seem that smoking should be banned in public, but in private, as then it is only harming the user. However, this is only the case if you agree that smoking in private is a self regarding action. We have seen arguments both for and against classify smoking as a completely other regarding action and if this is the case then in theory smoking should be completely banned. Smoking should also be banned completely if you believe the state should play a paternalistic role in protecting its citizens from the harm of smoking. Consent obviously plays a role in this topic and we have seen how it has been argued that a smoker who consents to the harm should be allowed to continue smoking, although there have even been contradictions to this. Practicality should not forgotten, and a complete ban in smoking raises some serious concerns about the social effect this would have. It seems then that a compromise is needed in order to decide whether smoking should be banned. A ban in public places seems to be best solution to the problem; it protects passive smokers yet eliminates the danger to society that would occur if smoking was completely banned. Of course, some would argue we are still letting individuals harm themselves, however adult humans know the risk of smoking, and on a whole the cost to the individual is less than the possible cost to society. It seems J.S Mills Harm Principle is ideal for addressing the question of a smoking ban, and a ban on public smoking, as seen in the UK and states around the world is the best solution. 1 N. Barry, Modern Political Theory 4th ed. (Basingstoke; Macmillan Press Ltd, 2000) p.211 2 Ibid. p.211 3 D.D. Raphael, Problems of Political Philosophy 2ND ed. (London; Pall Mall Press Ltd, 1990) p.78 4http:/smokefree.nhs.uk/why-go-smokefree/secondhand-smoke/ accessed December 5 2009 5 R. Garner, Introduction to Politics (Oxford; Oxford University Press, 2009) p.100 6 Garner (2009) p101 8 Rapheal (1990) p.66 9 Ibid. p66 10 Barry (2000) p.101 11 Rapheal (1990) p.81 12 R.E Goodin, The Ethics of Smoking, Ethics, Vol.99, No.3, (1989) p.588 13 Goodin (1989) p.586 14 Ibid. p.586 15 Goodin (1989) p.579 16Ibid p.586 17Barry (2001) p.219

How and Why Did Hitler Kill the Jews

How,why and with what results did Hitler persecute the Jews ? How,why and with what results did Hitler persecute the Jews ? Hitler made them numerous promises and used many techniques of propaganda. Through Hitlers entire regime , Hitler’s main goal was to persecute the jews. The Jews were severely mistreated by Hitler and his numerous followers. The inflicting of suffering, harassment, isolation, imprisonment, fear, or pain are all factors that established persecution of the Jews. There are various reason why Hitler wanted to persecute Jews in the first place.Hitler used gruesome methods of torture to persecute them. At the end of world war 1, Life for the German people became very difficult after the Treaty of Versailles. After paying a great amount of money for war damage to France and Great Britain, In 1929 Germany was in a economic depression of the worst kind. Hitler was a very inteligent man. He knew that the Germans was in a desperate state and were looking for someone to blame . He believed that the Jews were a threat to the so called superior ‘Aryan’ race, which was blonde haired,blue eyed and mainly German.He said there were many inferior races ,but the lowest of them all were the Jews. The Germans were extremely poor and unemployed. They turned to blame the Jews ,many whom were rich and successfull in business. Hitler made them promises such as new job openings and a decrease in unemployment if the Jews were taken out of the picture. Hitler was famouse for saying â€Å"If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed. † Hitler often told lies in his speeches . He was a great speaker and manged to convince the people that what he was saying was true.Hitler indoctrinated the children into beliving that the Jews were not pure blood and a threat to the nation through the curriculum and textbooks taught in school. Nother reason for his hatred were his anti capitalist and anti liberalism views. He claimed that the Jews were a part of an international conspiracy, and that he had profited from the misery of other Germans. All these were serious accusations but Germany was vulnerable other Germans. All these were serious accusations but Germany was vulnerable and was looking for something to believe in.Anti-Semitics believed Jews fit such stereotypes; ‘criminals, sexual predators, inferior, bacteria, unpatriotic’. To this day historians are confused about why Hitler personaly hated the jews . It is said that when Hitler was trying to make a living in Vienna, he often saw may Jews minting with money around him and thought it was unfair that they were extremely rich and he had to struggle to make a aliving. What further confuses the historians is that Hiters mother whom he worshiped was half Jewish resulting in him growing up in a semi jewish household.Once Hitler became chancellor of Germany in 1933,persecution of the Jews became official. Placards reading ‘Jew s not wanted’ were hung on doors outside shops and cafes. Jews were ade to wear the Star of David and beaten up on streets . In 1935,The Nuremberg laws were made. were antisemitic laws in Nazi Germany introduced at the annual Nuremberg Rally of the Nazi Party. Only Germans or those with related blood were considered citizens of the Reich from then on. Marriage or sexual relations between Jews and those of German blood. Were forbidden.By the mid 1930s the Jews were terrified and began to fled. Some went to Palestine,others to the USA and Britain. In 1938 the jews went around smashing Jewish stoores,homes and Synagogues. Ordinary German began to help in mudering the Jews. After Germany invaded Polandand Czechoslovakia in 1939 ,more Jews were trapped under German rule. The Germans began to transport Jews into the Ghettos. Initially Hitler began sending all jews to concentration camps. In the concentration camps, the Jews were either tortured or made to do hard labour. Even with the tiniest excuses they were shot.The Nazis killed physically or mentaly impaired jews without question. They would be selected for gassing this meant they would all be placed in a room and that mustard gas would be sprayed on them. If they survived, most Jews would slowly and systematically starved to death. This was made even worse because while they were being denied proper food, they were expected to do manual labour for long hours, despite being hungry and thirsty. As they were treated so badly,the Jews began to look like how they were made to seem in the propaganda posters making the Germans agree with Hitler even ore. the food was close to not non-existent, it was calculated to starve the Jews into corpses. Sometimes Jews were publicly hanged at roll call time. Jewish prisoners froze to death because they were not allowed to have any warm clothing or protection from the elements, and winters were very harsh. thers were experimented on by the notoriously brutal Dr. Mengele wh o used Jews to test out his own particular scientific theories. 2 million Jews were killed in 1941 ,when the invasion of the USSR began.The Final Solution in december 1941 was Nazi Germany's plan during World War II to annihilate the Jewish people, resulting in the most deadly phase of the Holocaust, the destruction of Jewish communities in continental Europe. about one million Jews were killed before the plans of the Final Solution were fully implemented in 1942, but it was only with the decision to eradicate the entire Jewish population that the extermination camps were built and industrialized mass slaughter of Jews began . The final solution implements what it’s name says, the final solution of getting rid of the Jews forever.Jews were rounded up in Germany,in Eastern Europe and every other part of the Nazi controlled Europe,Jews were sent to death camps. The most deadly extermination camp was in Auschwitz in Poland. 4 million people were sent and only 60,000 survived. Al l in all , the Holocaust will always be a big part of history as it resulted in deaths of millions of Jews who were all innocent people, who lived lives of hardships and torture to a great degree. We will never truly understand the pain and the sorrow they went through ,losing many loved ones. This was the destructive result of the persecution of the Jews. Rhea Daulet-Singh

What is Actually Going on with Academic Essay Writing Services Canada

What is Actually Going on with Academic Essay Writing Services Canada Reviews you are custom a writing service by means of your dissertation grade, you're writing trusting they are really talented. Double proofreading is vital! Now that you chose to obtain an essay online, you're surely interested concerning the whole procedure. Our website is just one of the most appropriate for essay help. You can depend on the ideal essay help online. Looking for custom writing for a dependable customized essay from 10. An academic essay always must be relevant. Always remember your academic essay ought to be playful it must not bore your audience. It should evoke an emotion that is necessary to spark other ideas, opinions and other kinds of responses. Our academic essay writing staff is made up of over 700 employees that are prepared to provide you with help on any type of book reviews. All you need to do is to put your purchase and essay the rest to us. You need to be competent in the issue you're discussing in your paper. Be precise with the goal of your writing. Life, Death, and Academic Essay Writing Services Canada You can create your life considerably more enjoyable canada ordering a paper at our site. Another benefit of our website is the quickness. Selecting a writing service might appear simple, but it's everything but as there are a lot of things to contemplate. It may seem canada, but it is everything but as there are plenty of things to consider. In any case, you might read the testimonials of our clients. 98% of our customers are pleased with the outcome, and most them place two or more orders normally. There are a number of reasons why you must prefer our services. What to Expect From Academic Essay Writing Services Canada? Students premium high quality papers, which is intended to each. Canada Essay Writing Help Service gives us the info that numerous students utilize this service since this is cheap and very affordable. Students lead busy lives and frequently forget about a coming deadline. Some students may say that it's quite an easy task even though others claim that it's quite complicated. In some instances, the assignment's requirements are so complex that it's problematic for the students to comprehend what the actual question is. If it is possible to write a suitable academic essay, it is going to support you greatly in your studies since you will get superior grades and earn your teachers' respect. Our qualified authors are experts in regards to finishing all kinds of academic writing so it is possible to depend on us. Most students usually find it troublesome to take care of literature reviews due to their length, and the simple fact they require in-depth research, and information understanding. Everyone is able to secure a very affordable paper of cover letter for office helper quality by means of a customized procedure. By being aware essay what a service can provide you, you are ready to canada an educated decision. Any excellent writing service will publish information regarding their group of writers on their website so that you know what type of expert you will be receiving. It will publish information about their team of writers on writing website so you know what kind of expert you will be getting.

A List of Important Inventions and Innovations