Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    A conclusion about all further cases is much stronger tha... — Carmelics
    Home/Problem of Evil
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Rowe's conclusion Q (that all further morally relevant properties will lack property J) may not be justified even if a conclusion about the next case would be justified.

    A conclusion about all further cases is much stronger than a conclusion about the next case.

    Problem of Evil
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Problem of Evil

    Related

    In some circumstances a conclusion about the next case is justified, but a concl...Rowe needs conclusion (1), which asserts that all further morally relevant prope...Rowe's conclusion Q (that all further morally relevant properties will lack prop...

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Problem of Evil
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    In some circumstances a conclusion about the next case is justified, b...89%Rowe's conclusion Q (that all further morally relevant properties will...78%A probabilistic conclusion can potentially be offset by positive evide...72%Rowe's argument for his first conclusion is difficult to fault.72%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: evil
    View source passageHide passage
    This is important, moreover, because it is (1) that Rowe needs, since the conclusion that he is drawing does not concern simply the next morally relevant property that someone might consider: conclusion Q asserts, rather, that all further morally relevant properties will lack property J. Such a conclusion about all further cases is much stronger than a conclusion about the next case, and one might well think that in some circumstances a conclusion of the latter sort is justified, but that a conclusion of the former sort is not.

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective