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 Anthropocentric privileging of members of the species Homo sapiens is morally unjustifiable.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral communities are constituted by relations of reciprocity, obligation, and shared normative practices that only humans can participate in.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Privileging members of a moral community over non-members is not arbitrary but reflects the structural basis of moral obligation itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The racism/speciesism analogy fails because race is morally irrelevant within a shared moral community, while species membership tracks morally relevant relational capacities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Partiality toward one's own kind is a defensible moral phenomenon grounded in special obligations, as argued by Bernard Williams and communitarian thinkers.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Humans occupy a unique position as the sole beings capable of recognizing, adjudicating, and acting on moral claims, which grounds a legitimate form of moral priority.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A framework that forbids all species-partiality proves too much, as it would equally condemn the partiality of any organism that prioritizes its own species' survival.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Privileging one group over others solely on the basis of group membership, without morally relevant justification, is arbitrary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Privileging humans over other sentient beings solely on the basis of species membership is analogous to sexism and racism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Sexism and racism are unjustifiable.
      ?

      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.