Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that A moral framework that renders no harm ultimately real undermines the grounds for any divine judgment, including eternal torment itself.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
A framework can treat harm as ultimately illusory while maintaining that perceived harm matters morally in this realm.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Divine judgment could be based on intent or violation of commands, not on harm's ultimate reality status.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Even if nothing is ultimately real, a coherent moral system can function within one consistent metaphysical view.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Justice requires that punishments be proportionate to real harms caused; unreal harms cannot justify any punishment.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A framework denying harm's reality denies the very suffering that makes eternal torment morally objectionable.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Divine judgment presupposes moral accountability, which requires that agents' actions produce genuine consequences.
?
How convincing is this?
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.