The Theory of the Moral Permissibility of the Subjective Harm
Subject Areas : Ethics and Islamic EducationKeywords: The Theory of the “Moral Permissibility of the Subjective Harm, ” Subjective Harm, Objective Harm.,
Abstract :
This paper shows that Mill has used 18 different terms for “harm” in his On Liberty. Then, it criticizes Mill’s “Harm Principle” and, instead, raises a new theory entitled the “Moral Permissibility of the Subjective Harm.” This theory is based on the “necessity” and “avoidability” of the “harm.” It uses “~□p → ◊~p” formula in the “deontic logic” to show the “unnecessity” and “avoidability” of the “harm” and distinguish “subjective” from “objective” “harm:” X is “objective” iff (if and only if) it is “necessary” or “unavoidable,” and it is “subjective” iff it is “unnecessary” or “avoidable.” Finally, it will describe the “reasons” and “consequences” of the “moral permissibility” of the “subjective harm.”
1. تامس، و. (1380). جان استوارت میل. ترجمه خشایار دیهیمی. تهران: طرح نو.
2. گرِی، ج. (1379). فلسفه سیاسی جان استوارت میل. ترجمه خشایار دیهیمی. تهران: طرح نو.
3. Berger, F. (1984). Happiness, Justice and Freedom: The Moral and Political Philosophy of John Stuart Mill. Berkeley: University of California Press.
4. Berlin, I. (1969). Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. Feinberg, J. (1984). Harm to Others. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
6. _ _ _ _ _ _. (1985). Offense to Others. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. _ _ _ _ _ _. (1986). Harm to Self. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
8. _ _ _ _ _ _. (1988). Harmless Wrongdoing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
9. Gray, J. (1983). Mill on Liberty: A Defence. London: Routledge.
10. _ _ _ _. (1989). Liberalisms: Essays in Political Philosophy. London, Routledge.
11. Hare, R.M. (1972). “Wrongness and Harm,” in R.M. Hare (ed.). Essays on the Moral Concepts. London: Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 92-109.
12. _ _ _ _ _ _ . (1982). “Natural Rights: Bentham and John Stuart Mill,” in H.L.A. Hart (ed.). Essays on Bentham. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 79–104.
13. Jefferson, T. ([1785] 1982). Notes on the State of Virginia, W. Peden (ed.). New York: Norton.
14. Lacewing, M. (2010). “Mill’s Harm Principle,” in Michael Lacewing (ed.).Philosophy for A2. London: Routledge.(Open Document, URL = <http://www.routledgetextbooks.com/textbooks/9781138793934/unit4.php/>, accessed 02.22.2016)
15. Lucas, J.R. (1966). Principles of Politics. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
16. Mill, J.S. ([1859] 1998). On Liberty. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State University. (Open Document, URL = <http://www2.hn.psu.edu/faculty/jmanis/jsmill/liberty.pdf>, accessed 02.22.2016).
17. London: University of Toronto Press & Routledge. 1-290.
18. Milton, J. ([1644] 1974). Selected Prose. C.A. Patrides (ed.). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
19. Nagel, E. (1968). “The Enforcement of Morals,” Humanist: 18-27.
20. Philips, D.Z. & Mounce, H.O. (1969). Moral Practices. London: Routledge.
21. Pyle, A. (1994). Contemporary Responses to John Stuart Mill. Bristol: Thoemmes Press.
22. Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
23. Rees, J.C. (1956). Mill and His Early Critics. Leicester: University of Leicester Press.
24. Riley, J. (1998). Mill on Liberty. London: Routledge.
25. Skorupski, J. (1989). John Stuart Mill. London: Routledge.
26. Ten, C.L. (1980). Mill on Liberty. Oxford: Clarendon University Press. (Open Document, URL = <http://www.victorianweb.org/philosophy/mill/ten/>, accessed 02.22.2016).
27. _ _ _ _ _. (1995). “Mill’s Place in Liberalism,” The Political Science Reviewer. 24: 179–204.
28. Tocqueville, A. ([1835] 1945). Democracy in America (Vol. 1), Henry Reeve (trans.), Phillips Bradley (ed.). New York: Vintage Books.
29. Winch, P. (1972). Ethics and Action. London: Routledge.