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 lifeguard must choose which group to save solely on the basis of the greater balance of good over bad, without giving extra weight to the fact that one group contains the lifeguard's friend.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Special obligations arise from particular relationships and roles, not merely from impartial assessments of aggregate welfare.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Bernard Williams argues that demanding impartiality in such cases requires 'one thought too many'—the friend's identity is itself a sufficient reason to act.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A morality that dissolves the agent-relative value of friendship into impartial calculus is alienated from the commitments constitutive of a meaningful life.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Deontological role-morality holds that the lifeguard's professional duty is structured by positional obligations, not solely by maximizing aggregate good.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Ross's prima facie duties include duties of fidelity and special obligation that can legitimately override impartial maximization in cases of comparable outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The well-being of a person is not made more valuable simply because that person is one's friend.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Just as one's own good is not more valuable than the good of others simply because it is one's own, the well-being of one's friend deserves no extra weight simply because of the friendship.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Impartiality requires that no personal relationship confers additional moral weight on an outcome.
      ?

      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.