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 Bernard Williams argued that consequentialist frameworks, even modified ones, undermine integrity by reducing personal commitments to impersonal calculations.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Sophisticated consequentialists can endorse agent-centered prerogatives that protect personal projects without abandoning consequentialist foundations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Integrity itself can be understood as a consequentialist value—societies where people maintain commitments have better outcomes than purely calculating agents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Williams conflates 'not always overriding commitments' with 'treating commitments as merely instrumental,' but the former is compatible with consequentialism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Consequentialism requires agents to treat all outcomes equally, making personal projects and relationships merely instrumental to aggregate utility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Integrity requires the ability to refuse to violate core commitments even when doing so maximizes overall good outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If your deepest commitments can always be overridden by consequentialist calculations, they cease to constitute genuine personal integrity.
      ?

      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.