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 moral system with only one absolute principle (monism) is false.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.There is more than one sort of morally relevant property, or more than one way in which features can become morally relevant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A monistic system recognizes only one absolute principle and therefore cannot account for this plurality of morally relevant properties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral phenomenology presents us with irreducibly distinct obligating features: harm, promise, fairness, and loyalty each generate reasons independently.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.W.D. Ross's prima facie duties demonstrate that no single master principle (e.g., maximizing welfare) can subsume all these without systematic distortion of our considered judgments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If a monistic principle must be perpetually qualified to handle counterexamples, the qualifications themselves constitute implicit additional principles, undermining genuine monism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Bernard Williams showed that agent-relative reasons (integrity, personal projects) are not reducible to impartial consequentialist or Kantian frameworks without alienating agents from their own commitments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Any monistic system that attempts to incorporate agent-relative reasons must abandon the single-principle structure, since agent-relative and agent-neutral reasons are logically distinct in kind.
      ?

      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.