On the Harm of Imposing Risk of Harm

Abstract What is wrong with imposing pure risks, that is, risks don’t materialize into harm? According to a popular response, pro tanto wrong, when and because risk itself harmful. Call this the Harm View. Defenders of view make one following two claims. On Constitutive Claim, imposition constitutes diminishing one’s well-being viz. preference-frustration or setting-back their legitimate interest in autonomy. Contingent has harmful consequences for risk-bearers, such as psychological distress. This paper argues View plausible only on but fails Claim. In discussing latter, I argue both preference autonomy account fail show constitutively thereby wrong. former, contingently narrow range cases. conclude while can sometimes explain (and because) harmful, it unsuccessful general, exhaustive what makes