Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Complacence in benevolence's beauty introduces an aesthetic pleasure that makes virtue contingent on sensory or emotional response.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Virtue grounded in sensory pleasure is unstable—moral actions motivated by beauty become vicious when beauty fades.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
True benevolence obligates action regardless of aesthetic reward; making it contingent corrupts the virtue itself.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Emotional pleasure is subjective and varies by individual; virtue cannot be contingent on unreliable sensory responses.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Humans are embodied beings; virtue divorced from emotional resonance lacks motivational force in actual moral practice.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Aesthetic experience of benevolence can reinforce virtuous habits by making them psychologically rewarding and repeatable.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If virtue requires only abstract duty, it becomes alien to human nature and inaccessible to most moral agents.
?
How convincing is this?
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.