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
    If deontological constraints admit of thresholds, then wr... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Wrong acts on a deontological account cannot be translated into bad states of affairs that are subject to aggregation.

    If deontological constraints admit of thresholds, then wrong acts must be comparable in magnitude, implying a scalar structure subject to aggregation.

    ?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.Thresholds necessarily involve degrees: a constraint applies below threshold T but not above, requiring magnitude comparisons.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If wrongs lack scalar structure, we cannot rationally justify why one threshold applies rather than another.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Aggregation enables principled distinction between many minor violations and one catastrophic violation triggering threshold.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Thresholds can be ordinal (comparative) without being scalar (quantitative): X is worse than Y without measuring magnitude.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aggregation presupposes violations are fungible and additive, but deontological wrongs may involve incommensurable moral categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A constraint could have sharp thresholds based on qualitative differences (e.g., intent vs. consequence) rather than scalar accumulation.
      ?

      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

    Consequentialism1 linked

    Related

    A constraint could have sharp thresholds based on qualitative differences (e.g.,...Aggregation enables principled distinction between many minor violations and one...Aggregation presupposes violations are fungible and additive, but deontological ...If wrongs lack scalar structure, we cannot rationally justify why one threshold ...
    +3 moreShow less
    Thresholds can be ordinal (comparative) without being scalar (quantitative): X i...Thresholds necessarily involve degrees: a constraint applies below threshold T b...Wrong acts on a deontological account cannot be translated into bad states of af...

    Details

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