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 Corrective justice traditions from Aristotle onward treat rectificatory desert as responsive to disturbance of a baseline, not to the victim's virtue or vice.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Corrective justice remedies must reflect the moral culpability of the wrongdoer; pure baseline restoration ignores this dimension.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Aristotle's texts discuss intention and vice when determining whether an act constitutes an injustice warranting rectification.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Victims' vulnerability to harm sometimes depends on their virtue; justice responsive to actual wrongs cannot ignore this context.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Justice requires neutrality about moral character; rectification targets harm suffered, not perpetrator's virtue or vice.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A baseline of rightful entitlements exists independent of parties' moral qualities; wrongs disturb this baseline objectively.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Aristotle's corrective justice explicitly contrasts with distributive justice, which considers character; rectification does not.
?
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.