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
    Claims of divine command that override moral norms are pr... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Abraham's obedience to God's command cannot be adjudicated by public reason

    Claims of divine command that override moral norms are precisely the kind of extraordinary claims demanding the highest public scrutiny, not exemption from it.

    ?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.Claims exempted from scrutiny enable abuse; history shows divine command justifies harm from slavery to violence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Public reasoning about shared norms strengthens rather than weakens legitimate faith communities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Extraordinary claims (divine override of ethics) require proportionally strong evidence, applying standard epistemology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Scrutiny presumes secular frameworks as default arbiter; religious epistemology may legitimately operate differently.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Most believers already integrate divine commands with moral reasoning; the conflict cases are rare, not systemic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Mandatory public scrutiny of sincere conscience claims risks majoritarian enforcement of moral conformity.
      ?

      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

    Democracy & Governance1 linkedReligious Experience1 linked

    Related

    Abraham's obedience to God's command cannot be adjudicated by public reasonClaims exempted from scrutiny enable abuse; history shows divine command justifi...Extraordinary claims (divine override of ethics) require proportionally strong e...Mandatory public scrutiny of sincere conscience claims risks majoritarian enforc...
    +3 moreShow less
    Most believers already integrate divine commands with moral reasoning; the confl...Public reasoning about shared norms strengthens rather than weakens legitimate f...Scrutiny presumes secular frameworks as default arbiter; religious epistemology ...

    Details

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