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 Any adequate theory of value must postulate some ultimate end outside of practice as a standard against which the value of acts as means can be judged.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Dewey's instrumentalism holds that ends are themselves evaluated as means to further ends, making 'ends-in-view' provisional rather than ultimate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A coherentist standard of value—where acts are judged by their systemic consequences within ongoing experience—avoids regress without positing a fixed external end.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The regress argument falsely assumes evaluation must terminate in a single fixed point rather than in a self-correcting, experiential feedback loop.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotelian phronesis demonstrates that practical wisdom adjudicates value contextually without appealing to a single ultimate end outside practice itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The demand for an external ultimate standard conflates the logical structure of justification with the actual deliberative structure of moral reasoning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.To judge the value of acts as means, there must be a standard against which those acts are measured.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If no ultimate end outside of practice is postulated, evaluating means requires appeal to further means, generating an infinite regress.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An infinite regress of means-evaluation is not a viable foundation for a theory of value.
      ?

      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.