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 Derek Parfit's 'resolute chooser' and Gauthier's constrained maximization show that agents who pre-commit to cooperative dispositions alter effective outcomes without escaping the game.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If pre-commitment truly alters outcomes, the agent has effectively changed the game itself, contradicting 'without escaping.'
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Constrained maximization only works if other agents believe the commitment is binding—requiring factors outside the original game.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The view conflates solving coordination problems with solving the prisoner's dilemma; commitment helps only when mutual.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Pre-commitment to cooperation changes what rational agents actually do, achieving better outcomes than simultaneous defection would.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Agents remain within game structure but transform its payoff logic through credible dispositional binding, not external escape.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This explains why cooperation emerges evolutionarily: dispositions that constrain maximize fitness without requiring external enforcement.
      ?

      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.