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 Consciously using people's need for esteem as a reason for trusting them is incompatible with actually trusting them.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Trust, on a motives-based account, requires a motive other than self-interest.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Deliberately leveraging another person's esteem-seeking behavior to get what one wants is a self-interested motive.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A motive that is self-interested cannot simultaneously be the motive required by motives-based trust.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Annette Baier's analysis holds that trust involves making oneself vulnerable to another's goodwill, not merely to their incentive structures.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When one consciously exploits esteem-needs, one relies on a psychological mechanism rather than on the trusted party's goodwill toward oneself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Reliance on a mechanism rather than goodwill reduces the relationship to a form of manipulation, which is structurally incompatible with the vulnerability constitutive of trust.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Philip Pettit's account requires that trust involves treating the other as a genuine moral agent responsive to normative reasons, not merely causal forces.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Consciously instrumentalizing another's esteem-need treats their behavior as a predictable causal output of a psychological drive, bypassing their rational agency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bypassing rational agency in this way precludes the stance of holding the other responsible that genuine trust, as a normative relationship, necessarily involves.
      ?

      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.