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
    Christine Korsgaard's constitutivism shows that the sourc... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→If one can prove on independent grounds that something is an end in itself, one will have an argument for a categorical imperative

    Christine Korsgaard's constitutivism shows that the source of categorical normativity is self-constitution, not the independent metaphysical status of ends.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Normativity must be grounded in something actual, and agents' self-constitutive practices are the only undeniable normative facts we possess.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Appealing to independent metaphysical ends creates regress: why should we care about their existence unless we've already constituted ourselves as the kind of being that does?
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Self-constitution explains why normativity binds us necessarily—it's constitutive of agency itself, not externally imposed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Self-constitution appears too voluntaristic: we cannot simply decide into normativity; some constraints pre-exist our choices.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If normativity depends solely on self-constitution, it becomes relativistic—each agent's norms could differ radically with no objective standard.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Korsgaard must assume agents have determinate, recognizable forms of agency prior to grounding norms, reintroducing the metaphysical commitments she rejects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Virtue Ethics1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    Appealing to independent metaphysical ends creates regress: why should we care a...If normativity depends solely on self-constitution, it becomes relativistic—each...If one can prove on independent grounds that something is an end in itself, one ...Korsgaard must assume agents have determinate, recognizable forms of agency prio...
    +3 moreShow less
    Normativity must be grounded in something actual, and agents' self-constitutive ...Self-constitution appears too voluntaristic: we cannot simply decide into normat...Self-constitution explains why normativity binds us necessarily—it's constitutiv...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit