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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that 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.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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