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 In a no-best-world scenario, if world-value exhausts God's reasons for acting, God never does what God has most reason to do, and thus God's action is never supremely morally good.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.A world is a maximal state of affairs that includes everything morally relevant.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.From a deliberative perspective, God must have more reason to realize a world with more value.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.In a no-best-world scenario, there is always a better world God could have actualized.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rational agency requires that for any action chosen, there exists a sufficient reason that favors it over alternatives (Leibniz's Principle of Sufficient Reason).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.In a no-best-world scenario, no world provides a sufficient reason for selection, since any candidate world is defeated by a better one.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An agent who acts without sufficient reason acts arbitrarily, and arbitrary action is incompatible with supreme moral goodness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Moral perfection entails responsiveness to reasons such that the agent reliably does what the objective axiological facts most support (Parfit's reasons-responsiveness condition).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If world-value exhausts God's reasons, then in a no-best-world scenario God's choice is never fully underwritten by those axiological facts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An agent whose choices are systematically underdetermined by the very reasons that constitute its standard of goodness fails the reasons-responsiveness condition for moral perfection.
      ?

      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.