Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that An obligation that predictably produces worse outcomes than an available alternative violates the core deontic function of directing agents toward the good.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Duties may bind agents regardless of outcomes—keeping promises matters even when breaking them helps more.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Predictability is uncertain; agents cannot always know which alternative truly produces better results long-term.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Some obligations protect rights or dignity that supersede consequentialist calculations about aggregate good.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Deontic systems exist to guide action; prescribing worse outcomes undermines their fundamental rational purpose.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Agents cannot be morally required to do what reliably prevents the good they're obligated to promote.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Obligation without regard to consequences becomes arbitrary, detached from the welfare it should serve.
?
How convincing is this?
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.