Many proponents of the Harm Principle seem to implicitly assume that the principle is compatible with permitting the free exchange of goods and services, even if such exchanges generate so-called market harms. I argue that, as a result, proponents of the Harm Principle face a dilemma: either the Harm Principle’s domain cannot include a large number of non-market harm cases or market harms must be treated on par with non-market harms. I then go on to discuss three alternative arguments defending the status of market harms as exceptions to the Harm Principle and discuss why these arguments also fail.

中文翻译：

---

市场损害应该是损害原则的例外吗？

伤害原则的许多支持者似乎暗中假设该原则与允许商品和服务的自由交换是相容的，即使这种交换会产生所谓的市场危害。我认为，因此，损害原则的支持者面临两难境地：要么损害原则的领域不能包括大量非市场损害案例，要么必须将市场损害与非市场损害同等对待。然后，我继续讨论三个替代论点，以捍卫市场损害的地位作为损害原则的例外，并讨论为什么这些论点也失败了。