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 FDS's good ought to be sacrificed for the sake of the good of the life as a whole, as articulated by EAS in her advance directive.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Psychological continuity theories privilege narrative coherence over the moral status of present experiential subjects, conflating biographical identity with numerical identity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.FDS, as a currently sentient being capable of suffering and pleasure, possesses interests that generate present-tense moral obligations independent of her R-relations to EAS.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Sacrificing a present subject's welfare for a past self's preferences treats the current person as a mere instrument, violating the Kantian constraint against using persons solely as means.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Agnieszka Jaworska and others have argued that the capacity for valuing, not higher-order rational autonomy, grounds the authority of preferences over one's own life.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.FDS demonstrably retains local valuing capacities—she forms attachments, experiences enjoyment, and expresses preferences—sufficient to ground a competing claim of self-determination.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An advance directive that overrides the expressed present values of a valuing subject cannot claim authority on autonomy grounds without begging the question of which temporal self's autonomy is privileged.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The life as a whole is best represented by the prudential unity that spans the longest and deepest portion of that life.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.EAS represents that dominant prudential unity, while FDS is only weakly R-related to it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Maximizing the good of the dominant prudential unity is equivalent to maximizing the good of the life as a whole.
      ?

      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.