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 G.E. Moore's open question argument establishes that defining goodness by any natural property, including functional success, commits the naturalistic fallacy.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The open question argument assumes conceptual non-identity proves metaphysical non-identity, but water and H2O are identical despite distinct concepts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moore provides no independent criterion for detecting the naturalistic fallacy besides the open-question intuition, making the argument circular.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Some natural properties (like promoting flourishing) may be genuinely constitutive of goodness rather than merely correlated with it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.For any natural property P, we can coherently ask 'Is P really good?' without contradiction, suggesting goodness is not identical to P.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Equating goodness with natural properties treats an evaluative concept as if it were purely descriptive, committing a logical category mistake.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Functional success describes what something does; goodness describes whether that deserves approval—these answer different questions.
      ?

      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.