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 will that applies universally in its effects can be general in substance even if it originates from a qualified deliberative subset rather than the entire populace.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Those excluded from deliberation lack voice in shaping rules binding them, violating equal democratic dignity regardless of outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Qualified subsets inevitably reflect their own interests and blind spots; universal applicability requires input from diverse affected populations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Calling non-participatory decisions 'general in substance' masks power asymmetries rather than resolving the legitimacy problem they create.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Legitimacy derives from rational justifiability to all affected parties, not necessarily their participation in decision-making.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Expertise-based deliberation by qualified subsets often produces better universal laws than aggregating uninformed mass preferences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Representative systems historically achieve broader acceptance than direct democracy when representatives act with transparent accountability.
      ?

      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.