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 theory counts as an agent-based form of virtue ethics only if the normative properties of motivations and dispositions cannot be explained in terms of something more fundamental (such as eudaimonia or states of affairs).

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's account treats virtuous motivation as both explanatorily basic for action-guidance and as constitutively tied to eudaimonia, without the latter reducing the former.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory can hold that motivations and eudaimonia are mutually constitutive rather than ordered by explanatory priority, making the irreducibility criterion rest on a false dichotomy between grounding and co-constitution.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rosalind Hursthouse's agent-centered eudaimonism demonstrates that normative force can flow bidirectionally between character and flourishing, undermining the claim that derivability from eudaimonia disqualifies a theory from being genuinely agent-based.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Michael Slote's agent-based sentimentalism grounds normative properties in caring motives, yet Slote himself acknowledges these motives track facts about well-being.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If even the paradigm case of agent-based virtue ethics covertly appeals to welfare facts, the proposed irreducibility criterion excludes the very theories it was designed to classify.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.An agent-based approach must explain what one should do by reference to the motivational and dispositional states of agents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.This condition alone is insufficient to distinguish agent-based virtue ethics, since every virtue ethical account meets it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A genuinely agent-based theory must treat the normative properties of motivations and dispositions as irreducible — not derivable from eudaimonia, states of affairs, or any other more fundamental normative ground.
      ?

      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.