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 were determined by comparing how principles treat each person, the doctrine of doing and allowing would collapse, since aggregative comparison ignores the moral significance of the act-omission distinction.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Aggregative comparison can preserve act-omission distinctions by assigning different weights to actions versus omissions in principle design.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The act-omission distinction itself requires justification; it may collapse under scrutiny independent of aggregative frameworks.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Comparative treatment analysis needn't ignore causal structure; principles can incorporate how each person is affected by active vs. passive choices.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Aggregative approaches sum outcomes across persons, treating all effects equally regardless of whether caused by action or inaction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The act-omission distinction attributes special moral weight to how agents causally produce harm, not merely comparative outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If principles only compare individual treatment levels, they cannot capture why actively killing differs morally from letting die.
      ?

      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.