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 principled restriction on desire-based reasons (e.g., requiring full information or rational reflection) smuggles in objective normative standards that externalists like Parfit and Scanlon explicitly endorse.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Requiring full information or rational reflection need not invoke objective standards—they follow from internal coherence within each agent's own practical deliberation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Even if Parfit/Scanlon endorse objectivity about reasons generally, they may restrict desire-based reasons using agent-relative criteria that don't require mind-independent values.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Distinguishing legitimate from illegitimate desires can be done via formal rational constraints (consistency, means-ends reasoning) without objective normative commitments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Any criterion for what counts as a valid desire-reason (coherence, information-access, rationality) presupposes a standard of correctness beyond mere desire-satisfaction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Parfit and Scanlon explicitly defend objective normative truths (e.g., about well-being or reasons), so their theories cannot ground restrictions on desire purely internally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If restrictions on desire were purely subjective, there would be no principled way to distinguish legitimate from illegitimate desire-based reasons across persons.
      ?

      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.