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 Consequentialist justifications permit punishing the innocent whenever doing so maximizes net welfare, which violates a near-universal constraint on just punishment.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Consequentialists can build constraints into their theory: punishing innocents typically has hidden costs (injustice, deterrence failure) that outweigh benefits.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The claim assumes consequentialists must ignore side-effects; sophisticated consequentialism includes rights and dignity as intrinsic welfare components.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Deontological 'near-universal constraints' lack justification without appeal to consequences—their force may ultimately rest on the very framework they reject.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Punishing innocents violates their fundamental right to fair treatment regardless of consequences, a constraint that precedes utilitarian calculation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Systems permitting innocent punishment erode public trust and rule of law, ultimately reducing long-term welfare more than gains from any single act.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A moral theory that licenses injustice to individuals for aggregate benefit fails to respect persons as ends in themselves, not mere welfare vessels.
      ?

      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.