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
    Deontological accounts ground friendship duties in promis... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Agent-relative consequentialism can account for the duties of friendship

    Deontological accounts ground friendship duties in promissory, historical, or relational obligations that are categorically binding, not merely heavily weighted considerations.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Promises create non-negotiable obligations distinct from mere preferences, binding us categorically regardless of competing interests.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Friendship involves implicit commitments that ground duties independent of consequences, similar to contractual obligations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Treating relational duties as merely 'weighted considerations' fails to explain why we condemn friendship betrayal even when beneficial.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Friendship duties often conflict categorically with other deontological duties, undermining claims of binding categorical status.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Many friendship obligations shift with context and emotional reciprocity, inconsistent with categorical, promissory bindingness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The distinction between 'categorical' and 'heavily weighted' lacks empirical grounding in how we actually deliberate about friends.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Consequentialism1 linked

    Related

    Agent-relative consequentialism can account for the duties of friendshipFriendship duties often conflict categorically with other deontological duties, ...Friendship involves implicit commitments that ground duties independent of conse...Many friendship obligations shift with context and emotional reciprocity, incons...
    +3 moreShow less
    Promises create non-negotiable obligations distinct from mere preferences, bindi...The distinction between 'categorical' and 'heavily weighted' lacks empirical gro...Treating relational duties as merely 'weighted considerations' fails to explain ...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit