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 that prior standard is direct utility maximization, th... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Sanction utilitarianism is internally inconsistent

    If that prior standard is direct utility maximization, then sanctions are redundant; if it is something else, the theory is pluralist, not utilitarian.

    ?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.Pure utilitarians derive all moral requirements from utility maximization; additional sanctions add non-utility-based constraints.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If sanctions operate independently of utility outcomes, they function as a separate moral principle, making the theory genuinely pluralist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Logical coherence requires that foundational principles not be redundant; redundancy indicates theoretical confusion about what matters.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Sanctions can be utility-maximizing mechanisms for enforcement; they need not represent independent principles or undermine utilitarianism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory can have multiple *implementation strategies* serving a single *foundational principle* without becoming pluralist in structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The dichotomy presented ignores hybrid positions: sanctions might be derivative from utility while remaining non-trivially distinct conceptually.
      ?

      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 theory can have multiple *implementation strategies* serving a single *foundat...If sanctions operate independently of utility outcomes, they function as a separ...Logical coherence requires that foundational principles not be redundant; redund...Pure utilitarians derive all moral requirements from utility maximization; addit...
    +3 moreShow less
    Sanction utilitarianism is internally inconsistentSanctions can be utility-maximizing mechanisms for enforcement; they need not re...The dichotomy presented ignores hybrid positions: sanctions might be derivative ...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)