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 By conforming to the categorical and hypothetical imperatives, a rational agent makes itself into an agent.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Agency is constituted by causal history and embodied dispositions, not conformity to formal imperatives (Aristotle, NE II.1; Anscombe, 'Modern Moral Philosophy').
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A being can satisfy the categorical imperative on a single occasion without thereby becoming an agent, revealing that conformity is at most a symptom, not a constitutive condition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Christine Korsgaard's self-constitution thesis presupposes a unified self that persists across actions, but Parfitian reductionism denies any such metaphysically robust self to be constituted.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If personal identity reduces to psychological continuity without a further fact (Parfit, 'Reasons and Persons' §15), then 'making oneself into an agent' names no determinate process over and above the occurrence of rational episodes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Some objects make themselves into the kind of objects they are by conforming to their constitutive standards (the self-constitution requirement).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rational agents are objects of this self-constituting kind.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The categorical and hypothetical imperatives are the constitutive standards of rational agency.
      ?

      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.