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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that A theory whose central explanatory concept lacks cross-situational stability cannot generate reliable extensional verdicts about what agents ought to do.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Cross-situational stability may be impossible for concepts involving context-sensitive terms like 'harm' or 'fairness' without reducing them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A concept can lack formal stability yet enable reliable action-guidance through skilled judgment, much like 'beauty' guides aesthetic decisions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates metaphysical stability with epistemic reliability—agents might reliably track an unstable concept through practical wisdom.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Normative guidance requires consistent application of principles across relevantly similar contexts, or else it fails as guidance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a concept's reference or application shifts unpredictably between situations, agents cannot reliably use it to deliberate about action.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Extensional verdicts about 'ought' claims require stable truth-conditions; unstable concepts undermine truth-apt moral judgment.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42