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 forced-benefit obligation cannot be grounded in harm pr... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Restrictions on A's freedom requiring A to benefit B may be justified on grounds of preventing harm to B, even if they cannot be justified on grounds of preventing A from harming B.

    A forced-benefit obligation cannot be grounded in harm prevention because harm prevention requires a prior wrongful act by A, which omissions alone do not supply.

    ?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.Harm prevention obligations typically require prior causation; A must have created or maintained the dangerous condition for a duty to arise.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Omissions involve no active creation of risk, only failure to intervene—categorically different from wrongful acts that generate remedial duties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without a wrongful act baseline, harm prevention obligations become unlimited positive duties, making everyone responsible for preventing all harms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Creating a dangerous situation and passively allowing an existing one can impose identical expected harms; causal responsibility may be morally equivalent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Special relationships (parent-child, doctor-patient) generate protective duties independent of prior wrongful acts by the duty-bearer.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates necessary conditions for obligations with sufficient ones; wrongful acts need not be the only ground for harm-prevention duties.
      ?

      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

    Rights & Liberty1 linkedJustice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    Creating a dangerous situation and passively allowing an existing one can impose...Harm prevention obligations typically require prior causation; A must have creat...Omissions involve no active creation of risk, only failure to intervene—categori...Restrictions on A's freedom requiring A to benefit B may be justified on grounds...
    +3 moreShow less
    Special relationships (parent-child, doctor-patient) generate protective duties ...The claim conflates necessary conditions for obligations with sufficient ones; w...Without a wrongful act baseline, harm prevention obligations become unlimited po...

    Details

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