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 decision procedure that ignores outcome magnitudes in f... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→When the outcome is uncertain, rational beings ought to choose in accordance with what is typically nature's purpose.

    A decision procedure that ignores outcome magnitudes in favor of typicality can mandate choices that maximally harm agents in non-typical cases.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Typicality-based procedures (e.g., rule utilitarianism) ignore actual consequences in edge cases where outcomes diverge dramatically from typical patterns.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral agents have obligations to prevent severe harm when foreseeable, even if the situation is atypical or violates standard decision rules.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A decision procedure that permits catastrophic outcomes in non-standard cases fails basic adequacy tests for ethical frameworks, regardless of typical-case performance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Outcome-maximizing procedures face intractable uncertainty about consequences; typicality-based rules provide epistemic stability that consequentialist approaches cannot guarantee.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Non-typical cases are statistically rare; optimizing for edge cases can systematically worsen outcomes in the typical cases where most harm actually occurs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim presupposes that decision procedures should handle all imaginable scenarios equally well, but robustness in common cases may rationally outweigh extreme edge cases.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Consequentialism1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    A decision procedure that permits catastrophic outcomes in non-standard cases fa...Moral agents have obligations to prevent severe harm when foreseeable, even if t...Non-typical cases are statistically rare; optimizing for edge cases can systemat...Outcome-maximizing procedures face intractable uncertainty about consequences; t...
    +3 moreShow less
    The claim presupposes that decision procedures should handle all imaginable scen...Typicality-based procedures (e.g., rule utilitarianism) ignore actual consequenc...When the outcome is uncertain, rational beings ought to choose in accordance wit...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit