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 Causing harm provides a pro tanto reason to regulate an action, but this reason may be outweighed by countervailing reasons not to regulate

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rights function as side-constraints, not merely as weights in a balancing calculus, so harm-based regulation cannot be outweighed by aggregate welfare gains.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Treating rights violations as pro tanto reasons converts deontological constraints into consequentialist trade-offs, collapsing the distinction Nozick argues is morally essential.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The pro tanto framework presupposes a commensurable scale on which harms and regulatory costs can be compared, but incommensurable values resist such aggregation (Raz, 'The Morality of Freedom').
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When competing considerations are genuinely incommensurable, the balancing model yields no determinate answer, making 'outweighing' a rhetorical rather than rational operation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Causing harm is always a non-negligible reason to regulate an action
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A pro tanto reason can be outweighed by stronger countervailing considerations
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If regulation is more harmful than the behavior being regulated, the pro tanto case for regulation is outweighed
      ?

      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.