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 principle permitting interference to prevent irreparable self-harm collapses the self/other distinction that liberal political philosophy depends upon to limit state and interpersonal coercion.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Liberal theory already permits limiting autonomy when choices would destroy the very capacity for autonomous choice itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Self/other distinction remains intact when intervention requires consent-inability (e.g., incompetence); this doesn't justify general coercion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Preventing irreparable harm differs from everyday paternalism; narrow emergency exceptions need not collapse principled boundaries.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Liberal legitimacy requires state neutrality among conceptions of the good; paternalism for self-harm abandons this neutrality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Once interference for self-harm is justified, distinguishing it from other harms becomes arbitrary, enabling unlimited state scope.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The self/other boundary protects autonomy as a foundational value; erasing it treats persons as mere objects of social management.
      ?

      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.