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
    Imposing rationality thresholds as preconditions for mora... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Not just any causally undetermined, agent-caused, or randomly generated choice qualifies as a free choice for which the agent is morally responsible.

    Imposing rationality thresholds as preconditions for moral responsibility conflates epistemic competence with the volitional structure that actually grounds accountability.

    ?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.Moral responsibility requires the capacity to act on reasons one endorses, not merely the ability to process information rationally.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A person with low IQ but intact willpower can still deserve blame for breaking promises they freely chose to make.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Rationality thresholds exclude agents with cognitive disabilities from moral community despite their ability to form intentions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Volitional agency itself depends partly on rational capacities like means-end reasoning and understanding consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Severe irrationality (e.g., inability to grasp basic cause-effect) can undermine genuine endorsement of one's actions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The distinction between epistemic and volitional competence breaks down in cases where beliefs directly constitute intentions.
      ?

      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

    2 topics

    Eternal Conscious Torment1 linkedAfterlife & Death1 linked

    Related

    A person with low IQ but intact willpower can still deserve blame for breaking p...Moral responsibility requires the capacity to act on reasons one endorses, not m...Not just any causally undetermined, agent-caused, or randomly generated choice q...Rationality thresholds exclude agents with cognitive disabilities from moral com...
    +3 moreShow less
    Severe irrationality (e.g., inability to grasp basic cause-effect) can undermine...The distinction between epistemic and volitional competence breaks down in cases...Volitional agency itself depends partly on rational capacities like means-end re...

    Details

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