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 Acquiring special obligations does not reduce what a moral agent owes to other persons generally; it simply adds more obligations on top of existing general duties.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Special obligations generate agent-relative reasons that structurally override, not merely outweigh, competing general duties in cases of genuine conflict.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When an obligation is systematically overridden by competing obligations, it is functionally equivalent to a diminished obligation for that agent in that context.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, acquiring special obligations does not merely add to an agent's moral burden but reorganizes the priority structure of all their obligations, effectively reducing the action-guiding force of general duties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.On Samuel Scheffler's account, special obligations are partly constitutive of personal integrity and identity, not external additions to a pre-existing moral baseline.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If special obligations are constitutive of the agent who bears general duties, then the general duties themselves are shaped by and filtered through those special commitments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the general duty of benevolence that exists 'prior to' special obligations is an abstraction that never actually operates independently, meaning special obligations partly define rather than merely supplement it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A moral agent has a general duty of benevolence toward all persons.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Special relationships (promiser/promisee, creditor/debtor, spouse, parent/child, friend, compatriot) generate additional obligations beyond the duty of benevolence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The more special relationships one stands in, the more obligations one acquires.
      ?

      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.