@article{36a70c51a12e492a8b842a7b9780df1e,
title = "Freedom and viruses",
abstract = "A common argument against lockdowns is that they restrict freedom. On this view, lockdowns might be effective in protecting public health, but their impact on freedom is purely negative. This article challenges that view. It argues that while lockdowns restrict freedom, so too do viruses. Since viruses restrict freedom and lockdowns protect us from viruses, lockdowns can protect us from the harmful effects that viruses have on freedom. The problem we face is not necessarily freedom versus public health. Sometimes it is freedom itself—or its value or distribution—that provides reason for lockdowns.",
author = "Kieran Oberman",
note = "Funding Information: * Work on this article received funding from the European Union{\textquoteright}s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under Marie Sk{\l}odowska-Curie grant agreement 842176. The article was presented to the UCL Legal and Political Theory Colloquium, the Leeds Centre for Contemporary Political Theory Research Seminar Series, and PEAK. I am grateful to participants for excellent feedback. Written comments from Richard Bellamy, Matthew Chrisman, Jeff Howard, Jeff McMahan, Alan Oberman, Tom Parr, Adam Swift, and the reviewers and editors for Ethics greatly improved the article. I owe special thanks to Ian Carter and Joseph Bowen for their help with multiple drafts. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.",
year = "2022",
month = jul,
doi = "10.1086/719516",
language = "English",
volume = "132",
pages = "817--850",
journal = "Ethics: An International Journal of Social, Political, and Legal Philosophy",
issn = "0014-1704",
publisher = "University of Chicago",
number = "4",
}