What degree of control and manipulation is ethical?

Affable

Is there anyway to set the boundaries for what is legitimate use of human power and control and manipulation? Is the boundary set at anything that's within a person's power to do so that doesn't cause them guilt? Is it set at anything which violates the idea that we are all equal in dignity?
Or what?

Any ideas?

Queen-Mise

More likely to lie in the 'equal dignity' rather than the 'guilt' idea.

Is this covered in the UN Charter of Human Rights at all....

Joe1919

Affable wrote: »

Is there anyway to set the boundaries for what is legitimate use of human power and control and manipulation?

There are different opinions on this but a utilitarian (e.g. J S Mill) could probably argue that 'legitimate use of human power and control and manipulation' would be ethical provided there was an overall positive result in term of an increase in happiness and a decrease in 'harm'.
However Mill also argues that people should be entitled to their liberty and to do what they want provided they do no harm to others.

I was looking at Vincent Brown the other night and there was a debate about smoking and whether cigarette companies should be penalised or put out of business. Would banning cigaretts be considered a 'legitimate use of human power and control and manipulation' to prevent the smoker from not smoking?
Do smokers harm others? Some argue yes by saying they occoupy badly needed hospital beds etc.

Affable

Joe1919 wrote: »

There are different opinions on this but a utilitarian (e.g. J S Mill) could probably argue that 'legitimate use of human power and control and manipulation' would be ethical provided there was an overall positive result in term of an increase in happiness and a decrease in 'harm'.
However Mill also argues that people should be entitled to their liberty and to do what they want provided they do no harm to others.

I was looking at Vincent Brown the other night and there was a debate about smoking and whether cigarette companies should be penalised or put out of business. Would banning cigaretts be considered a 'legitimate use of human power and control and manipulation' to prevent the smoker from not smoking?
Do smokers harm others? Some argue yes by saying they occoupy badly needed hospital beds etc.

Yes, but what is 'legitimate power and manipulation'? Where do yoy corss the line? And what constitues harm to others, shouldn't decpetion fall under that umbrella? Banning cigarettes would be more legitimate than the manipulation thats gone on to get people hooked on em.