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 original position's epistemic constraints logically entail utilitarian choice, Rawls cannot stipulate non-utilitarian outcomes without abandoning the contractarian derivation.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The original position's constraints are stipulated by Rawls to exclude utilitarian reasoning; veil ignorance doesn't determine choice independently of design.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Contractarian legitimacy can rest on the fairness of the procedure itself rather than logical entailment, permitting stipulated non-utilitarian outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rawls's non-utilitarian conclusions follow from correctly modeling rational choice under lexical priority constraints, not abandoning contractarian derivation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.The veil of ignorance logically forces rational agents to maximize expected utility by eliminating personal bias and information asymmetry.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If contractarian legitimacy depends on what choice procedures entail, Rawls cannot override procedural outputs without undermining the contractarian basis.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rawls's actual endorsement of non-utilitarian principles suggests either the epistemic constraints don't entail utilitarianism or he abandoned derivational rigor.
      ?

      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.