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
    Intuitionist philosophers like Ross and Prichard distingu... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A child first being taught simple moral principles does not yet have a justification for those principles based on self-evidence

    Intuitionist philosophers like Ross and Prichard distinguished between having a justified moral belief and being able to give a discursive account of its justification.

    ?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.We demonstrably know many truths (math, perception) without articulating formal justifications for them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Requiring discursive justification creates infinite regress: each justification needs its own justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Moral perception may function like sensory perception—immediate and justified without argumentative reconstruction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Inability to articulate justification may indicate lack of genuine understanding rather than two separate capacities.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction lacks clear criteria: what counts as 'having' vs 'articulating' a justified belief remains unclear.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If justification is inexpressible in principle, it becomes impossible to distinguish it from mere conviction or prejudice.
      ?

      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

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    A child first being taught simple moral principles does not yet have a justifica...If justification is inexpressible in principle, it becomes impossible to disting...Inability to articulate justification may indicate lack of genuine understanding...Moral perception may function like sensory perception—immediate and justified wi...
    +3 moreShow less
    Requiring discursive justification creates infinite regress: each justification ...The distinction lacks clear criteria: what counts as 'having' vs 'articulating' ...We demonstrably know many truths (math, perception) without articulating formal ...

    Details

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