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 the distinction between irresistible and merely unresisted urges cannot be principled, the exempting category loses the normative weight Fischer and Ravizza assign to it.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A distinction can be principled without being perfectly sharp; borderline cases don't undermine the core conceptual difference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Irresistible urges involve broken volitional mechanisms; unresisted urges involve intact mechanisms exercised badly—a real difference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Normative weight doesn't require metaphysical precision; pragmatic distinctions can justify differential responsibility assignments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Any normative exemption requires a principled distinction; without it, exemption becomes arbitrary and loses moral justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The irresistible/unresisted distinction collapses under scrutiny: both involve agents unable or unwilling to conform to moral standards.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the distinction cannot be drawn consistently, Fischer and Ravizza's responsibility framework conflates different agents unfairly.
      ?

      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.