Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that If there is nothing that is any more just, then it cannot be against the principles of justice
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Justice is defined by fixed principles (respect rights, treat equals equally), not by comparative better/worse alternatives among options.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
An action can violate justice even if all alternatives are equally unjust—e.g., torturing innocents remains unjust regardless of context.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
The claim confuses 'most just available option' with 'just action'; these differ fundamentally in moral evaluation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Justice requires comparison: an action violates justice only if a better alternative exists that we should have chosen instead.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If all available options are equally just, then none can be condemned as unjust since none fails to meet the standard of justice.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Moral blame presupposes the agent could have done otherwise justly; without such alternatives, condemnation becomes incoherent.
?
How convincing is this?
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.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42