This work develops an analysis of Sunstein’s libertarian paternalism. Three standpoints are compared: 1) the anti-paternalism of Mill’s Harm Principle, 2) Sunstein’s libertarian paternalism (Nudge) and 3) non-libertarian paternalism typically exemplified by prohibitionism. With some qualifications, the work claims that libertarian paternalism is compatible with the Harm Principle, since it does not generate obligations or prohibitions for the addressees of the paternalist measures. At the same time, the work points out some problems and ambiguities in Sunstein’s theses.
© 2001-2024 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados