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 that generates obligatory extinction cannot coherently ground partial population-reduction policies without an arbitrary threshold.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Many valid principles entail extreme conclusions in pure form but rationally permit moderate applications via independent constraints.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A threshold can be non-arbitrary if grounded in separate principles (feasibility, consent, rights) rather than deriving from the original principle.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates logical entailment of a conclusion with coherence of partial implementation—different rational standards.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If a principle logically entails total extinction, any partial application requires a cutoff point not derivable from the principle itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Thresholds imposed externally to a principle are arbitrary unless justified by that same principle—creating circularity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Coherence requires that grounding justifications for policy remain stable across their domain of application.
      ?

      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.