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
    Laws should not criminalize conduct that is inherently ha... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Laws should not criminalize conduct that is inherently hard to prove, such as witchcraft

    Justice & PunishmentRights & Liberty
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Laws should make it as easy as possible for an innocent person to prove innocence
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Crimes that are inherently difficult to prove make it nearly impossible for an innocent person to establish innocence
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rousseau and natural law theorists hold that law's legitimacy derives from its correspondence to genuine moral wrongs, not from prosecutorial convenience.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If witchcraft were a real harm, the state's inability to easily prosecute it would not diminish its status as a wrong deserving legal prohibition.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Montesquieu's argument conflates the epistemic limits of courts with the normative question of what conduct a just legal order ought to prohibit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The evidentiary difficulty of proving a crime is a procedural problem to be solved by law of evidence, not a reason to decriminalize the conduct itself.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Blackstone's procedural reforms and the development of rules against spectral evidence show societies can regulate proof standards without abandoning criminalization.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Justice & PunishmentRights & Liberty

    Related

    Blackstone's procedural reforms and the development of rules against spectral ev...Crimes that are inherently difficult to prove make it nearly impossible for an i...If witchcraft were a real harm, the state's inability to easily prosecute it wou...Laws should make it as easy as possible for an innocent person to prove innocenc...
    +3 moreShow less
    Montesquieu's argument conflates the epistemic limits of courts with the normati...Rousseau and natural law theorists hold that law's legitimacy derives from its c...The evidentiary difficulty of proving a crime is a procedural problem to be solv...

    Similar

    Crimes that are inherently difficult to prove make it nearly impossibl...77%Laws should not facilitate false accusations against innocent persons75%Requiring a higher standard of proof for the less serious crime of the...74%Laws should make it as easy as possible for an innocent person to prov...74%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: montesquieu
    View source passageHide passage
    Liberty also requires that the laws concern only threats to public order and security, since such laws will protect us from harm while leaving us free to do as many other things as possible. Thus, for instance, the laws should not concern offenses against God, since He does not require their protection. They should not prohibit what they do not need to prohibit: "all punishment which is not derived from necessity is tyrannical. The law is not a mere act of power; things in their own nature indif
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit