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
    Alice's act was morally wrong — Carmelics
    Home/Consequentialism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Alice's act was morally wrong

    Consequentialism
    ?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.Actual consequentialism holds that actual consequences determine moral rightness
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Alice's act caused harm
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Objective consequentialism evaluates acts by expected value under epistemic constraints, not unknowable actual outcomes (Jackson 1991).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Alice acted on the best available evidence and her act had the highest expected utility, the harm was epistemically unforeseeable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An act that is epistemically optimal cannot be morally wrong under any plausible action-guiding consequentialist standard.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rule consequentialism (Brandt, Hooker) holds that acts are right if they conform to rules whose general acceptance maximizes welfare.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A harmful outcome from following an optimific rule does not render the act wrong; wrongness attaches to rule-violation, not bad outcomes per se.
      ?

      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

    Consequentialism

    Related

    A harmful outcome from following an optimific rule does not render the act wrong...Actual consequentialism holds that actual consequences determine moral rightnessAlice's act caused harmAn act that is epistemically optimal cannot be morally wrong under any plausible...
    +3 moreShow less
    If Alice acted on the best available evidence and her act had the highest expect...Objective consequentialism evaluates acts by expected value under epistemic cons...Rule consequentialism (Brandt, Hooker) holds that acts are right if they conform...

    Similar

    Abortion is morally wrong.90%Theft is morally wrong88%An act is morally wrong if it would be disastrous if everybody violate...84%Alice's act caused harm83%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: consequentialism
    View source passageHide passage
    Some utilitarians bite the bullet and say that Alice’s act was morally wrong, but it was blameless wrongdoing, because her motives were good, and she was not responsible, given that she could not have foreseen that her act would cause harm. Since this theory makes actual consequences determine moral rightness, it can be called actual consequentialism.
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit