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
    Hayek contends that liberty is indivisible: selective pro... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Not all liberties deserve equal protection; some liberties are more important than others.

    Hayek contends that liberty is indivisible: selective protection creates arbitrary state power over which activities count as sufficiently deliberative.

    ?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.State agents lack neutral criteria for distinguishing 'sufficiently deliberative' activities, inevitably injecting subjective political preferences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Once state power selectively protects some liberties, bureaucrats gain discretionary authority to expand or contract protections based on changing political winds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Historical precedent shows governments use 'deliberation' standards to suppress unpopular speech, religious practice, and assembly selectively.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Some activities (fraud, coercion, incitement to violence) causally harm others in ways that justify differential legal treatment without arbitrariness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Absolute indivisibility is self-defeating: protecting liberty itself requires state restrictions on force, making some selective limitation logically necessary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Transparent legal standards and judicial review can meaningfully constrain arbitrariness in liberty protections without requiring blanket uniformity.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    1 topic

    Rights & Liberty1 linked

    Related

    Absolute indivisibility is self-defeating: protecting liberty itself requires st...Historical precedent shows governments use 'deliberation' standards to suppress ...Not all liberties deserve equal protection; some liberties are more important th...Once state power selectively protects some liberties, bureaucrats gain discretio...
    +3 moreShow less
    Some activities (fraud, coercion, incitement to violence) causally harm others i...State agents lack neutral criteria for distinguishing 'sufficiently deliberative...Transparent legal standards and judicial review can meaningfully constrain arbit...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit