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 Lack of purchasing power constitutes a constraint on negative liberty, not merely a personal inability.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If a person lacks money to purchase a good, any attempt to take that good will be met with preventive actions or punishment by the shopkeeper or agents of the state.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Such preventive actions or punishment constitute interpersonal interference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Interpersonal interference is precisely what the negative concept of liberty is concerned with.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.MacCallum's triadic framework shows freedom is always 'freedom of X from Y to do Z', where Y includes any preventing condition, not only intentional acts.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Coercive background rules establishing property rights are human-made constraints that systematically prevent the poor from accessing resources others can freely use.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Cohen argues that laws criminalizing takings without payment are what actually prevent the poor from acting, making the constraint social and interpersonal, not merely natural.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Hobbes himself defined liberty as absence of external impediments, and legally enforced price barriers are external impediments created by deliberate social arrangements.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The distinction between inability and unfreedom collapses when the inability is itself produced and maintained by enforceable legal structures rather than natural facts.
      ?

      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.