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 that denies intrinsic value to intermediate goods is monist at every level that matters morally, making pluralism at the choice level a superficial relabeling.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Multiple intrinsically valuable end-states can justify genuinely plural choices, even if each intermediate good serves only instrumental roles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Choice-level pluralism tracks real moral distinctions (autonomy, dignity, process-fairness) even when all paths serve one foundational value.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A theory can be monist about ultimate value yet fundamentally pluralist about what makes an option morally permissible or rational.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If intermediate goods have no intrinsic value, their moral significance derives entirely from end-states they produce.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Pluralism about choice-level options collapses to monism when all options evaluate to a single underlying metric at the foundational level.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Calling different instrumental paths 'plural' obscures that they're merely different routes to one monistic end-value.
      ?

      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.