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

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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