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 Joel Feinberg's 'ante-mortem interest' view holds that harm consists in the setback of interests, not in the experiencing of a bad state.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Harm's moral urgency seems tied to suffering and negative experience; setback to abstract interests lacks obvious normative force.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Not all interest-setbacks matter morally (e.g., thwarting desire for false fame), suggesting experience or other factors determine real harm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The account struggles to explain why we should care about interests if their setback produces no negative consciousness whatsoever.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.We intuitively judge harms to unconscious people and the dead as real, which requires a theory disconnected from subjective experience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Interest-setback theory explains why betrayal harms us even when we never discover it, whereas experience-based theories struggle here.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This view preserves our moral obligations to future generations and non-sentient beings with interests in not being wronged.
      ?

      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.