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 widely shared intuition rooted in evolutionary psychology or social conditioning carries no independent normative authority.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
All moral reasoning ultimately depends on some foundational intuitions; rejecting all intuition-based authority leaves no ground for ethics.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Convergent intuitions across evolutionary pressures may track objective features of human flourishing, making them epistemically reliable.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The distinction between 'evolutionary origin' and 'normative truth' may be false; our moral faculties could be both shaped and truth-tracking.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Evolutionary origins explain *why* we believe something, not *whether* it is true or good. Origin and justification are distinct.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Widespread intuitions often contradict each other across cultures, suggesting they reflect contingent conditioning rather than moral truth.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If intuitions had normative force merely by being shared, we couldn't rationally critique harmful social practices like historical slavery.
?
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.