Assignment task: Write a one-and-a-half to two page reflection
The problem of the commons and what we owe each other. Libertarians and other conservative social-contract theorists way that our only duties to each other involve some version of Mill's harm principle. Mill says: the only legitimate reason for society to intercede in a person's affairs is to prevent him/her from harming others. For Mill, for an action to count as harm, there must be an "identifiable subject of harm." (In other words, someone must be directly harmed by the action.) Rawls is a bit more "squishy". He says that we all have an equal right to "the most extensive liberty compatible with a like liberty for all." Communitarians, however, say that we owe more to each other than that. Many point to the "commons" (some good we all hold in common, like public parks) as something that we must respect, not only because it is in our own interest, but also in the interest of others.
Think about a factory whose production processes pollutes the air in a community. They say that it will be very expensive to retrofit the factory to control pollution, and that an ordinance demanding that they do this would cause them to shut down, costing the community many jobs. Apply Mill's harm principle, Rawls' two principles of justice to the case: what would they say should be done? What would the communitarian say, in your view? Finally, what do you think? Should the demand for the retrofit be made? Why or why not?