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 Distributional issues such as egalitarian evaluation require interpersonal comparisons of well-being, which can be understood in terms of utilities.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Sen's capability approach demonstrates that well-being comparisons require evaluating what people can do and be, not merely their utility levels.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Utility functions systematically fail to capture adaptive preferences, where oppressed individuals adjust desires to constrained circumstances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Egalitarian evaluation grounded in utilities therefore obscures rather than reveals genuine distributive injustice.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rawls's veil of ignorance argument establishes that just distributive principles must be chosen without knowledge of interpersonal utility comparisons.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If interpersonal utility comparisons were foundational to egalitarian evaluation, Rawls's difference principle would require cardinal utility data it deliberately excludes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, robust egalitarian frameworks like Rawlsian justice are logically independent of interpersonal utility comparisons.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Egalitarian evaluation of allocations requires determining who the worst-off individuals are.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Determining who is worst-off requires comparing levels of well-being across individuals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Utility functions provide a natural framework for expressing such interpersonal comparisons.
      ?

      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.