John Mill The Harm Principle

Philosopher John Mill created an ethical theory known as the Harm Principle, which helps to define the moral boundaries a governing authority has a right to impose over its people. Believing primarily in negative right, Mill’s Harm Principle states that “The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant” concluding that an authority has no moral right to impose positive rights upon its people. In other words, the Harm Principle implies that a governing authority has no moral grounds to coerce or inforce a person to help others, or themselves. Going farther into the limits of authority imposed by the Harm Principle, Mill believes the only moral authority which can be imposed is that you cannot harm another. Summarizing as negative rights, an authority only acts ethically when stopping a person with coercer or force, from inflicting harm against another person. And so “if an individual’s conduct does not harm others, then social regulation of that behavior is not justified”. Furthermore, Mill does not find paternalistic, and or moralistic reasons vail for an
Granted many people hold the same or very similar prima facie duties, for example having the duty to save a drowning child, not all do. And given the off chance a by passer witnessing this, cannot swim, and believes in a Spaghetti God which makes it a sin to touch water on that particular day, it would make it wrong for an authority to punish a citizen for their beliefs, and for not placing themselves in danger for another. And while most citizens would find it a prima facie duty to help the child, not everyone holds this value. Making it immoral to implement moralistic law, for not everyone has the same fundamental