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 wider consequentialist approach may be more compatible with environmental ethics than utilitarian ethics.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Utilitarian frameworks can aggregate welfare across sentient non-human animals, already extending moral concern well beyond anthropocentric limits.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Peter Singer's preference utilitarianism grounds robust environmental protections by including the interests of all sentient beings affected by ecological harm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates utilitarianism's theoretical foundations with its practical scope, since sentient-inclusive utility calculations can oppose most environmentally destructive practices.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wider consequentialism's attribution of intrinsic value to non-sentient natural objects faces the 'location problem': intrinsic value requires a valuing subject, as argued by Korsgaard and others.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If intrinsic value in nature must ultimately be grounded in conscious experience to be action-guiding, wider consequentialism collapses back into a sentience-centered framework indistinguishable from sophisticated utilitarianism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Wider consequentialism attributes intrinsic value not only to pleasure or satisfaction but also to objects and processes in the natural environment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Utilitarian ethics is limited to attributing intrinsic value to pleasure or interest satisfaction.
      ?

      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.