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 right to justify coercion to others is not sufficient to neutralize the autonomy cost of rendering certain deliberative paths normatively unavailable.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
All rights involve limiting others' options; if justified rights neutralize autonomy costs, the claim's conclusion doesn't follow.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Normative unavailability of paths (via justified constraint) differs from cognitive/physical unavailability and may not diminish autonomy.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If a person endorses the justifying reasons for constraint, their deliberative autonomy is exercised through that endorsement, not harmed.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Autonomy involves not just making choices, but the meaningful availability of diverse deliberative pathways reflecting one's values.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Justifying coercion to someone doesn't restore their capacity to consider options you've rendered normatively forbidden to them.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The autonomy cost of foreclosed deliberation is distinct from and irreducible to whether coercion can be rationally justified.
?
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.