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
    In cases involving conflicting moral principles, moral in... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    In cases involving conflicting moral principles, moral intuition is required to determine what action one ought to perform, all things considered

    Moral ResponsibilityVirtue Ethics
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Prima facie principles (e.g., one ought to be kind, other things being equal) can conflict in particular situations
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.No principle alone resolves conflicts between prima facie duties
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.W. D. Ross holds that we must use moral intuition to adjudicate between conflicting principles in a given case
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Coherentist moral reasoning (Rawls, Daniels) resolves principle conflicts through reflective equilibrium, not raw intuition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Reflective equilibrium systematically revises both principles and judgments until consistency is achieved, bypassing the need for intuitive adjudication.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A method that produces revisable, coherent justifications is epistemically superior to an unrevisable intuitive verdict in cases of moral conflict.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Utilitarian aggregation (Bentham, Mill, Singer) provides a single, non-intuitive metric—net welfare—that resolves conflicts between competing prima facie duties.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a principled algorithm can adjudicate moral conflicts without appealing to intuition, then intuition is not required but merely contingently used when rigorous theory is absent.
      ?

      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.

    Topics

    Moral ResponsibilityVirtue Ethics

    Related

    A method that produces revisable, coherent justifications is epistemically super...Coherentist moral reasoning (Rawls, Daniels) resolves principle conflicts throug...If a principled algorithm can adjudicate moral conflicts without appealing to in...No principle alone resolves conflicts between prima facie duties
    +4 moreShow less
    Prima facie principles (e.g., one ought to be kind, other things being equal) ca...Reflective equilibrium systematically revises both principles and judgments unti...Utilitarian aggregation (Bentham, Mill, Singer) provides a single, non-intuitive...W. D. Ross holds that we must use moral intuition to adjudicate between conflict...

    Similar

    W. D. Ross holds that we must use moral intuition to adjudicate betwee...92%Moral intuition is essential to arriving at moral knowledge84%Moral reasoning requires making sense of cases in which there are mora...83%Both approaches require intuition at some stage — either to apply a ge...83%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-epistemology
    View source passageHide passage
    At the other extreme are forms of moral particularism, according to which one directly intuits the moral rightness or wrongness of an act once one has understood its particular natural features (see the entry on moral particularism). As in the previous case it is necessary to comprehend the non-moral features of the situation before a specific moral judgment can be made and known to be true. In making this judgment, however, one must rely not merely on knowledge of these non-moral features but
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit