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
    A promise cannot exist if the promisee refuses to accept it — Carmelics
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    A promise cannot exist if the promisee refuses to accept it

    Philosophy of LanguageSocial Contract
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Promises are always made to some person or persons
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The promisee has the authority to refuse to accept a promise
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A promise's existence is conditional on its acceptance (or at least not being rejected) by the promisee
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A promissory obligation can arise from the promisor's sincere, voluntary utterance independent of the promisee's reception or acceptance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Raz and Scanlon both ground promissory obligation in the normative significance of voluntary self-binding, not bilateral agreement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If acceptance were required, a promise made to an unconscious or absent party would generate no obligation, which contradicts strong moral intuitions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Searle's speech act theory treats promises as illocutionary acts completed by the speaker's sincere intention under appropriate conditions, not by hearer uptake.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Requiring promisee acceptance collapses the morally distinct categories of promise and contract into a single bilateral structure, erasing a theoretically significant distinction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageSocial Contract

    Connections

    1 topic

    Rights & Liberty1 linked

    Related

    A promise's existence is conditional on its acceptance (or at least not being re...A promissory obligation can arise from the promisor's sincere, voluntary utteran...If acceptance were required, a promise made to an unconscious or absent party wo...Promises are always made to some person or persons
    +4 moreShow less
    Raz and Scanlon both ground promissory obligation in the normative significance ...Requiring promisee acceptance collapses the morally distinct categories of promi...Searle's speech act theory treats promises as illocutionary acts completed by th...The promisee has the authority to refuse to accept a promise

    Similar

    The promisee has the authority to refuse to accept a promise91%A promise must be accepted (or at least not rejected) in order to be g...88%A promise's existence is conditional on its acceptance (or at least no...87%If a gift or promise is not accepted or not rejected, the giver has do...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: promises
    View source passageHide passage
    To begin with the most obvious point, promises are always to some person or persons. There must be a promisee who is given by virtue of the promise an ensemble of rights and prerogatives she would otherwise not have had. But it is also important, as I shall be arguing presently is true of all transactions, that it is part of the very idea of a promise that the promisee already has some rights and prerogatives (hence some (second-personal) authority to make claims and demands) with respect to the
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit