Toleranz und/oder Paternalismus im engeren sozialen Nahbereich?

English version

​Typically, we are inclined to exhibit two seemingly contradictory attitudes in close personal relationships at the same time, a tolerating attitude and a paternalistic one. On the one hand, we think that everyone has a right to make decisions about his or her way of life for him- or herself, and this also holds for people we care about, even if we think that the decision in question is wrong or bad for the person even according to her own standards or values. We have to tolerate these decisions. On the other hand, we are at the same time inclined to act paternalistically toward people we care about, simply because we want what is best for them.
In this paper, I discuss the tension between both attitudes and their action-guiding implications in the context of close personal relationships. In so doing, I, firstly, reject the idea that one attitude simply has to make way for the other. Secondly, I also reject a seemingly obvious, liberal way of combining them, which assigns priority to toleration and only allows for a very limited paternalism. This position falls short of taking into account the specifics of what it means to be in a close personal relationship with someone. Close personal relationships call for the possibility of a more extensive paternalistic attitude and way of acting. My conclusion is that, while the practical question of how to act remains open and has to be carefully considered in each situation anew, at least the two attitudes, ultimately, prove to be two sides of the same coin, namely of a more comprehensive attitude of care concerning the well-being and autonomous flourishing of the persons who are important to us.