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 Harsanyi demonstrated that rational agents under genuine ignorance should maximize expected utility, not adopt maximin, making the veil's output indeterminate without smuggled-in assumptions.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The veil of ignorance is a thought experiment about fairness, not a decision-theoretic setup requiring expected utility calculations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Maximin is defensible as a rational principle when stakes are catastrophic and probabilities are genuinely unknown, not just when smuggling assumptions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Harsanyi's assumptions (cardinal utility, neutrality axiom) are themselves substantive moral commitments that beg questions against Rawls.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Expected utility theory is the normative standard for rational decision-making under uncertainty across economics and decision theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rawls's veil of ignorance lacks specification of probability distributions, making maximin an unjustified choice among many possible principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Harsanyi's aggregation theorem shows that impartial preferences under uncertainty mathematically yield utilitarian conclusions, not egalitarian ones.
      ?

      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.