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 we need non-consequentialist criteria to fix the refer... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Rule consequentialists should ask 'What would happen if everybody were permitted to do that?' rather than 'What would happen if everybody did that?'

    If we need non-consequentialist criteria to fix the reference class of permissions, rule consequentialism loses its claim to be a self-standing moral theory.

    ?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.A theory is self-standing only if all its normative principles derive from its core commitment without external moral assumptions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rule consequentialism's core commitment is that rules are right iff their acceptance produces best consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Defining the permission reference class requires non-consequentialist judgments about what counts as a permissible alternative rule.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.All moral theories rely on some background framework (conceptual or metaphysical) distinguishing moral from non-moral facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Needing external criteria to specify a theory's domain doesn't undermine its status as an independent substantive moral theory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rule consequentialism could acknowledge reliance on non-consequentialist logic while remaining consequentialist about permissibility itself.
      ?

      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 is self-standing only if all its normative principles derive from its c...All moral theories rely on some background framework (conceptual or metaphysical...Defining the permission reference class requires non-consequentialist judgments ...Needing external criteria to specify a theory's domain doesn't undermine its sta...
    +3 moreShow less
    Rule consequentialism could acknowledge reliance on non-consequentialist logic w...Rule consequentialism's core commitment is that rules are right iff their accept...Rule consequentialists should ask 'What would happen if everybody were permitted...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit