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
    It is reasonable to revise how one treats a person who ha... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    It is reasonable to revise how one treats a person who has revealed callous, unreliable, or untrustworthy attitudes, even if that person could not help being that way.

    Justice & PunishmentMoral Responsibility
    ?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.Blame and the relational adjustments that follow from it respond to what a person's attitudes actually are.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A person who has revealed callous, unreliable, or untrustworthy attitudes has shown that they are, for whatever reason, that kind of person.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.One cannot be expected to continue treating someone as though their revealed attitudes do not reflect who they are.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Reactive attitudes like blame and relational adjustment are only fitting when the target possessed genuine alternative possibilities at the time of action (van Inwagen).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a person could not help having callous attitudes, holding relational adjustments against them treats a natural condition as a moral failing, violating the Kantian principle that ought implies can.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Strawson's own framework distinguishes objective from reactive stances precisely because determinism about character warrants the objective stance, not revised moral blame.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Justice requires that treatment tracking character rather than choice collapses the distinction between punishment and quarantine, undermining retributive legitimacy (Duff).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A person's revealed attitudes are morally relevant bases for adjustment only if they were formed under conditions of sufficient epistemic and volitional control, which the claim explicitly denies.
      ?

      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 ResponsibilityJustice & Punishment

    Connections

    1 topic

    Forgiveness & Mercy1 linked

    Related

    A person who has revealed callous, unreliable, or untrustworthy attitudes has sh...A person's revealed attitudes are morally relevant bases for adjustment only if ...Blame and the relational adjustments that follow from it respond to what a perso...If a person could not help having callous attitudes, holding relational adjustme...
    +4 moreShow less
    Justice requires that treatment tracking character rather than choice collapses ...One cannot be expected to continue treating someone as though their revealed att...Reactive attitudes like blame and relational adjustment are only fitting when th...Strawson's own framework distinguishes objective from reactive stances precisely...

    Similar

    A person who has revealed callous, unreliable, or untrustworthy attitu...85%One cannot be expected to continue treating someone as though their re...78%That a person may be criticized in many ways for holding an attitude d...74%For example, accountability blame should perhaps be moderated in the c...73%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: contractualism
    View source passageHide passage
    Scanlon’s contractualist account of blame sets aside issues of freewill and determinism. Because blame is a reaction to the attitudes a person actually has, it is not undermined by the discovery that he “had no control over the factors that made him the kind of person that he is.” (Scanlon 2008, p. 178) Even if you cannot help being callous, unreliable, and untrustworthy, I cannot be expected to continue to treat you as if you had not revealed that, for whatever reason, that is the kind of perso
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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