Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Any principled account of why a feature is worth investigating in a new case implicitly commits to a proto-principle linking feature-types to moral relevance.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Epistemic humility about features' moral relevance differs from commitment to a proto-principle linking them.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Investigators can provisionally highlight features for study without claiming they are morally relevant or following principles.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The distinction between 'worth investigating' and 'morally relevant' undermines the claim's equation of these categories.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Selecting which features matter in novel cases requires implicit criteria distinguishing relevant from irrelevant features.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Any criterion for relevance, even tacit ones, constitutes a principle linking feature-types to their moral significance.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Denying this commits one to arbitrary case-by-case judgments without principled justification.
?
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.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42