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
    Cross-border cooperative contributions to basic security ... — Carmelics
    Home/Democracy & Governance
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Reciprocity obligations do not divide neatly state by state.

    Cross-border cooperative contributions to basic security are as significant as intra-state contributions.

    Democracy & GovernanceSocial Contract
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Democracy & GovernanceSocial Contract

    Related

    Reciprocity obligations do not divide neatly state by state.The law-abidingness of neighbors in Mexico is more crucial to physical security ...Treaties and peaceful relations among militarily armed states, produced by peace...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Democracy & Governance
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Similar

    Reciprocity obligations to fellow cooperators in basic security scheme...73%The presence of multiple nations under one state creates mutual checks...72%Caregivers provide valuable cooperative contributions to society.71%Socially disadvantaged people may benefit equally as much as socially ...70%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: egalitarianism
    View source passageHide passage
    This line of thought prompts several questions. If stringent egalitarian duties to needy people arise only because the needy participate in a scheme of cooperation with the non-needy, then strategic action to avoid the duties seems permissible. If the rich separate from the poor and form their own distinct political communities, the reciprocity argument will no longer support the claim that the rich have substantial obligations to the poor. One might question whether genuine justice obligations

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective