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 promissory obligation can arise from the promisor's sincere, voluntary utterance independent of the promisee's reception or acceptance.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Obligations are essentially relational: they bind one party to another only when the other party stands in position to be wronged by non-performance.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Without promisee awareness, no one can reasonably rely on the utterance, so breach causes no actual harm—making obligation conceptually empty.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Acceptance is the promisee's mechanism to consent to being bound; unilateral utterance imposes duties without mutual agreement or reciprocal vulnerability.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Obligation is primarily a mental state of the promisor: sincere commitment to perform creates duty regardless of external validation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Requiring acceptance makes obligation dependent on factors beyond promisor's control, undermining moral responsibility for one's declarations.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Many binding commitments (vows, oaths, public pledges) generate obligations through utterance alone without requiring audience acceptance.
?
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.