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 If deontic facts can be self-evident without grounding in evaluative facts, then the explanatory relationship asserted by teleological views is not necessary.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Self-evidence is epistemically important but does not entail metaphysical independence; deontic facts can seem self-evident yet depend on evaluative facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Teleological necessity concerns why deontic facts obtain metaphysically, not whether we can know them without explicit evaluative reasoning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim conflates justification (how we know) with grounding (what makes facts true), so deontic self-evidence leaves teleological grounding untouched.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Deontic facts (facts about obligations) can be known through rational intuition without deriving them from evaluative facts about goodness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If deontic facts are self-evident and knowable independently, then grounding them in teleological evaluative facts becomes metaphysically dispensable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Teleological views require a causal or explanatory link between value and obligation; independent deontic self-evidence breaks this required link.
      ?

      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.