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
    Abraham's obedience to God's command cannot be adjudicate... — Carmelics
    Home/Religious Experience
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Abraham's obedience to God's command cannot be adjudicated by public reason

    Democracy & Governance
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The requirement of communicability and clear decision procedures can be suspended by God's fiat
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Public reason relies on shared communicable norms to decide whether an act is legitimate or deluded
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Abraham's case involves a divine command that suspends those shared norms
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Public reason does not require shared metaphysical premises, only overlapping procedural standards for evaluating extraordinary claims (Rawls, Habermas).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Claims of divine command that override moral norms are precisely the kind of extraordinary claims demanding the highest public scrutiny, not exemption from it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Exempting religious commands from public adjudication creates an unfalsifiable category that could justify any atrocity under divine authorization.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant argues in 'The Conflict of the Faculties' that any command to violate clear moral duties must be judged false regardless of its purported divine source.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Abraham's command cannot be adjudicated by public reason, then neither can any other claimed divine command, eliminating the distinction between faith and fanaticism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Religious ExperienceDemocracy & Governance

    Connections

    4 topics

    Insubordination to God2 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linkedDivine Attributes1 linked

    Related

    Abraham's case involves a divine command that suspends those shared normsClaims of divine command that override moral norms are precisely the kind of ext...Exempting religious commands from public adjudication creates an unfalsifiable c...If Abraham's command cannot be adjudicated by public reason, then neither can an...
    +4 moreShow less
    Kant argues in 'The Conflict of the Faculties' that any command to violate clear...Public reason does not require shared metaphysical premises, only overlapping pr...

    Similar

    Public reason cannot decide whether Abraham's act was legitimate obedi...78%One is not required to obey a state solely because the state has issue...75%One acts unjustly if one fails to comply with the state's commands.74%The state compels obedience to its commands and affirms that these com...74%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: kierkegaard
    View source passageHide passage
    From Kierkegaard’s religious perspective, however, the conceptual distinction between good and evil is ultimately dependent not on social norms but on God. Therefore it is possible, as Johannes de Silentio argues was the case for Abraham (the father of faith), that God demand a suspension of the ethical (in the sense of the socially prescribed norms). This is still ethical in the second sense, since ultimately God’s definition of the distinction between good and evil outranks any human society’s
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Public reason relies on shared communicable norms to decide whether an act is le...
    The requirement of communicability and clear decision procedures can be suspende...
    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit