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 proper subset relation requires shared criteria of appl... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→HP1 (harm causation principle) is narrower than HP2 (harm prevention principle) because HP1 is a proper part of HP2.

    A proper subset relation requires shared criteria of application, but HP1 invokes agency and causation while HP2 invokes outcomes alone.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Subset relations in logic require identical definitional criteria; mixing agency with outcomes violates the transitivity requirement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.HP1 (agent-focused) and HP2 (outcome-focused) pick out different essential features, making one a subset only if one criteria subsumes the other.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without shared criteria, we cannot derive HP2 cases from HP1 cases systematically, breaking the logical structure subsets require.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Agency and causation can be instrumental to outcomes; criteria need not be identical to establish subset relations, only ordered inclusion.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Many legitimate subsets mix conceptual components—e.g., 'criminal act' subsets 'intentional act' despite adding legal criteria to volitional ones.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If all HP1 cases necessarily produce the outcomes specified by HP2, the subset relation holds regardless of whether criteria are formally identical.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Rights & Liberty1 linkedJustice & Punishment1 linked

    Related

    Agency and causation can be instrumental to outcomes; criteria need not be ident...HP1 (agent-focused) and HP2 (outcome-focused) pick out different essential featu...HP1 (harm causation principle) is narrower than HP2 (harm prevention principle) ...If all HP1 cases necessarily produce the outcomes specified by HP2, the subset r...
    +3 moreShow less
    Many legitimate subsets mix conceptual components—e.g., 'criminal act' subsets '...Subset relations in logic require identical definitional criteria; mixing agency...Without shared criteria, we cannot derive HP2 cases from HP1 cases systematicall...

    Details

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