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
    Any duty of benevolence, even non-maximizing, requires a ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A non-maximizing duty of benevolence can be balanced with special obligations without contradiction.

    Any duty of benevolence, even non-maximizing, requires a principled threshold distinguishing permissible partiality from morally arbitrary favoritism.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Without principled thresholds, any preference for friends/family becomes indistinguishable from racism or nepotism in structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral agents must be able to justify their choices to others; arbitrary favoritism fails this publicity requirement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Special relationships generate genuine duties (to children, spouses) that require principled boundaries to avoid moral chaos.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The threshold itself may be as arbitrary as the partiality it constrains—merely relocating rather than solving the problem.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Some meaningful partial duties (love, friendship) resist reduction to principles and lose their character when formalized.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Non-maximizing benevolence permits supererogatory choices; demanding principled thresholds overintellectualizes permissible discretion.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Consequentialism1 linkedVirtue Ethics1 linked

    Related

    A non-maximizing duty of benevolence can be balanced with special obligations wi...Moral agents must be able to justify their choices to others; arbitrary favoriti...Non-maximizing benevolence permits supererogatory choices; demanding principled ...Some meaningful partial duties (love, friendship) resist reduction to principles...
    +3 moreShow less
    Special relationships generate genuine duties (to children, spouses) that requir...The threshold itself may be as arbitrary as the partiality it constrains—merely ...Without principled thresholds, any preference for friends/family becomes indisti...

    Details

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