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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Hare's prescriptivism holds that moral universalizability is a logical, not empirical, feature of moral terms like 'wrong'.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Whether people actually apply universalizability when making moral judgments is an empirical question about moral psychology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The meaning of 'wrong' may be partly conventional and culturally determined, making universalizability a learned feature, not logical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Determining 'relevant similarity' between cases requires empirical investigation of consequences, not logical analysis alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The meaning of 'wrong' logically entails that if an act is wrong for person A, it must be wrong for anyone in relevantly similar circumstances.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Universalizability doesn't depend on psychological facts about humans; it flows from the concept itself, making it a logical feature.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.We can recognize someone's moral judgment as self-contradictory simply by analyzing their language, without empirical investigation.
      ?

      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.
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42