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 wrongness is partly explained by what principles individuals could not reasonably reject, then feeding wrongness back into contractualist deliberation is not circular but reflects the reflexive structure of moral justification Rawls recognized in reflective equilibrium.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If wrongness partly explains what's rejectably wrong, the contractualist criterion becomes uninformative about which rejections are actually justified.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Reflexive structure doesn't eliminate circularity—it merely names it; the claim conflates acceptable mutual dependence with logical independence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rawls's reflective equilibrium works because considered judgments and principles are logically distinct inputs; contractualism lacks this separation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Reflective equilibrium requires iterating between principles and judgments; contractualism similarly cycles between rejectability and principles.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Wrongness as unexplainable by reasonable rejection creates a regress; acknowledging it grounds contractualist deliberation without infinite circularity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Moral justification is inherently reflexive: standards justify conclusions that partly constitute those standards, avoiding vicious circularity.
      ?

      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.