The idea that we should be free to pursue our own goods, as long as we do not hurt others, is not particularly a conservative thought. It stems from Mill's On Liberty. It also seems to underpin most democratic thinking - the idea is that you have as much freedom as possible, but not so much freedom that you can harm others.
The problem, of course, is figuring out when your actions start harming others. If you object to the idea of my having sex with another woman, am I harming you? If I apply for the same job as you do and get it because I'm more qualified, am I harming you? In some sense, sure. But presumably not in a sense that should be prohibited. Direct harm is easy to understand; indirect harm is more difficult.
(I won't be back to read comments/responses, but I thought I'd throw in some philosophical background.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2008-10-18 05:00 pm (UTC)The problem, of course, is figuring out when your actions start harming others. If you object to the idea of my having sex with another woman, am I harming you? If I apply for the same job as you do and get it because I'm more qualified, am I harming you? In some sense, sure. But presumably not in a sense that should be prohibited. Direct harm is easy to understand; indirect harm is more difficult.
(I won't be back to read comments/responses, but I thought I'd throw in some philosophical background.)