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 Deserving something does not always require that a favorable or unfavorable appraising attitude be fitting toward the deserving party.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.An abandoned sick child deserves medical care and nurturance in virtue of her need.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The child's sickness does not make it appropriate for onlookers to admire or condemn the child.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Neither a positive nor a negative appraising attitude is called for toward the sick child.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rawls distinguishes pre-institutional desert from justice-based entitlements, showing desert can arise from morally neutral facts like need or status.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Desert bases can be non-evaluative properties (e.g., being a human, being injured) that ground claims without implying any praiseworthy or blameworthy conduct.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If desert required a fitting appraising attitude, infants and non-agents could never deserve anything, which contradicts robust intuitions about basic welfare rights.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Feinberg's analysis distinguishes desert from moral worth: one can deserve compensation for misfortune without the misfortune reflecting on one's character.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Corrective justice traditions from Aristotle onward treat rectificatory desert as responsive to disturbance of a baseline, not to the victim's virtue or vice.
      ?

      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.