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
    Extending formal equality to personal selection does not ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Formal universal equality of opportunity is not inherently inappropriate for assessing people's engagement in personal, private, and intimate interaction.

    Extending formal equality to personal selection does not merely regulate discrimination; it misidentifies the evaluative structure of the domain, committing a category error in normative application.

    ?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.Personal selection domains (friendship, intimacy, association) operate on subjective preference and compatibility, fundamentally unlike employment or public accommodation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Applying equality rules designed for distributive justice to relational goods misapplies the normative framework, like using medical ethics to evaluate aesthetic judgments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Formal equality requires treating relevantly similar cases similarly, but 'similarity' in intimate contexts depends on factors (chemistry, values) external to protected categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The 'category error' claim assumes personal selection is purely subjective, but discrimination patterns reveal systematic exclusion based on group membership, not genuine incompatibility.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Distinguishing 'personal' from 'public' domains itself requires normative justification; historically, excluding groups from intimate spheres has enabled material and social subordination.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if domains differ evaluatively, formal equality can apply without eliminating preference—it only prohibits decisions based on immutable traits while allowing other selection criteria.
      ?

      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.

    Key Terms

    Category error(as used in logic and philosophy of language)
    A logical mistake where you apply a rule or concept to something it doesn't actually fit, like using a math formula on a poem.
    Evaluative structure(in ethics)
    The underlying system or framework that determines what counts as good, bad, right, or wrong in a particular situation.
    Formal equality(in ethics and law)
    The idea that everyone should be treated by the same rules or standards, without exceptions based on who they are.
    Normative application(in ethics)
    Using rules or standards about how things *should* be done to guide decisions or actions in a real situation.
    Personal selection(in ethics)
    The act of someone choosing or picking based on their own preferences, values, or judgment.
    Regulate discrimination(in ethics and law)
    To control or limit unfair treatment of people based on characteristics like race, gender, or religion.
    domain(Both f1 and f2 have the reals as their domain)
    The set of input values over which a function is defined.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Social Contract1 linkedRights & Liberty1 linked

    Related

    Applying equality rules designed for distributive justice to relational goods mi...Distinguishing 'personal' from 'public' domains itself requires normative justif...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    Even if domains differ evaluatively, formal equality can apply without eliminati...
    Formal equality requires treating relevantly similar cases similarly, but 'simil...
    +3 moreShow less
    Formal universal equality of opportunity is not inherently inappropriate for ass...Personal selection domains (friendship, intimacy, association) operate on subjec...The 'category error' claim assumes personal selection is purely subjective, but ...