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 It is unclear whether the moral relationship is sufficient to explain the blame of strangers.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • Even if there is some relationship between a victim and the stranger who victimizes them, it is not clear that this relationship plays any role in grounding the blame.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.P.F. Strawson's reactive attitudes require a relationship of mutual accountability, but strangers lack the standing that makes such accountability robustly binding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Blame of strangers relies on impersonal moral norms rather than relational expectations, suggesting a categorically different grounding than relationship-based blame.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If relational ties were sufficient for stranger-blame, the intensity and appropriateness of blame should scale with relational closeness, yet our practices do not consistently reflect this.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Angela Smith's recognition model grounds blame in the quality of an agent's regard for others, which presupposes an evaluative relationship, but strangers share no prior evaluative history.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Without a shared history of interaction, the moral relationship between strangers is too thin to generate the normative expectations whose violation constitutes the core of blameworthy conduct.
      ?

      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.