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 judgment that merely follows a rule is only 'right,' not 'just'

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rule-following is itself a normative practice requiring interpretive judgment, as Wittgenstein's rule-following considerations demonstrate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between 'mere calculation' and 'genuine adjudication' collapses if every competent application of a rule already involves irreducible normative discretion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If rule-application always involves such discretion, Derrida's 'just' decision cannot be distinguished structurally from what he dismisses as merely 'right'.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Lon Fuller and Ronald Dworkin argue that legal rules carry internal moral principles that a judge actualizes through faithful interpretation, not despite rule-following but through it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If justice can be immanent within rules rather than transcendent to them, a judgment that faithfully applies a rule may simultaneously instantiate justice, not merely legality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.For a decision to be just, a judge must not only follow a rule but also re-institute it in a new, unique judgment
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Following a rule without re-institution is mere calculation and not genuine adjudication
      ?

      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.