Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Justice, as a species of duty under Mill's account, inherits the indirect character of sanction utilitarianism.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Mill treats justice as grounded in a distinct sentiment—the impulse to defend rights—that operates independently of utility calculations.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If justice has its own psychological and normative basis in rights-protection, it cannot simply inherit its character from sanction utilitarianism.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
A species can possess distinctive properties not derived from its genus, so justice-as-duty need not share duty's indirect structure.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Brandt and Lyons argue Mill's Utilitarianism Chapter 5 treats justice as lexically prior to other duties, not merely a subspecies of them.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If justice carries stronger, near-absolute obligatory force than ordinary duty, it resists reduction to the sanction-based indirect framework governing duty generally.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Mill's account of duty is an indirect form of utilitarianism (sanction utilitarianism).
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Justice is a species of duty under Mill's account.
?
How convincing is this?
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.