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

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.