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 Justice is always to come in the future and is never present

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Aristotle's phronesis demonstrates that practical wisdom achieves genuine justice in particular cases through cultivated moral perception, not infinite deferral.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A virtuous judge who perceives the salient features of a situation and responds with equitable judgment instantiates justice as a present achievement, not a perpetual absence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Derrida's trilemma in P1-P3 commits a false exhaustion by collapsing the Aristotelian middle ground between mechanical rule-following and groundless decision.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rawls's reflective equilibrium establishes that justice can be provisionally realized when principles and considered judgments achieve sufficient coherence under idealized conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If justice were structurally always deferred, reform movements that produced measurable reductions in domination and arbitrary power could not count as progress toward justice, which contradicts our most confident moral data points.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If a decision has not followed a rule, it is unjust
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If a decision has followed a rule with no foundation, it is again unjust
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If a decision followed a rule calculably, it failed to respect the singularity of the case and is again unjust
      ?

      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.