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 Kant's account of radical evil requires that the agent subordinate the moral law to inclination through a free act of maxim-adoption.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Kant's own account suggests evil may result from weakness of will or frailty, not deliberate maxim-reversal, undermining the requirement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The notion that agents can freely adopt maxims while their incentive structure is already corrupted appears conceptually incoherent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Empirical observation shows most wrongdoing stems from unconsidered habituation rather than explicit acts of maxim-adoption.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Kant defines radical evil as corruption of the incentive structure itself, requiring conscious reversal of moral and sensible motives.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Only a free act of maxim-adoption can constitute genuine moral culpability; automatic inclination lacks the voluntariness evil requires.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Subordination of moral law to inclination must be chosen to explain why agents remain responsible despite their corrupted nature.
      ?

      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.