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 moral terms rigidly designate natural properties discovered empirically, openness of associated questions is expected, not damning.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Moral terms carry normative force; natural property terms do not. This deep difference undermines the water/goodness analogy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If 'good' rigidly designates a natural property, it should be identifiable empirically. Its persistent elusiveness suggests it doesn't.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The openness of 'is X good despite having property Y?' suggests goodness isn't reducible to natural properties, defeating the original claim.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Water rigidly designates H₂O yet 'is water the same as H₂O?' remained open until empirical discovery—this is precedent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Moral properties, if natural, should behave like other natural kinds: discoverable gradually, not conceptually transparent a priori.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Openness of questions reflects epistemic humility about consciousness and complex properties, not semantic incoherence in the claim itself.
      ?

      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.