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
    Learning morality initially from examples and authority i... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Learning morality initially from examples and authority is not inconsistent with morality being grounded in a priori intuition

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?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.Mathematics is also learned initially through concrete examples and reliance on authority
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.As understanding develops, mathematical truths come to be grasped in a way that is not dependent on experience
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Moral understanding may follow the same developmental pattern as mathematical understanding
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mathematical development moves toward formal proof that bypasses authority entirely, but moral 'maturity' retains irreducible dependence on socially-validated intuitions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If moral intuitions cannot be validated independently of the social contexts that shaped them, the analogy to a priori mathematical insight collapses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Wittgenstein and Rawls both show that moral competence is constituted by trained responses within practices, not by access to mind-independent truths.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If moral intuitions are themselves the product of contingent habituation, they cannot serve as evidence for a priori moral facts without begging the question.
      ?

      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

    Moral ResponsibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Skepticism2 linked

    Related

    As understanding develops, mathematical truths come to be grasped in a way that ...If moral intuitions are themselves the product of contingent habituation, they c...If moral intuitions cannot be validated independently of the social contexts tha...Mathematical development moves toward formal proof that bypasses authority entir...
    +3 moreShow less
    Mathematics is also learned initially through concrete examples and reliance on ...Moral understanding may follow the same developmental pattern as mathematical un...Wittgenstein and Rawls both show that moral competence is constituted by trained...

    Similar

    Moore's account of a priori moral knowledge is intuitionist, not ratio...80%Moral intuition is essential to arriving at moral knowledge80%In cases involving conflicting moral principles, moral intuition is re...79%Objectivist theories that treat morality as having objective authority...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-epistemology
    View source passageHide passage
    One concern about all forms of moral intuitionism is the fact that people can continue to disagree about the moral facts when they appear to agree on the non-moral facts. If we all possess the same faculty of moral intuition, should such disagreement be possible at all? But the moral intuitionist can counter this objection in the way suggested earlier when we considered the argument against the possibility of moral knowledge based on disagreement. There are too many other factors that may explai
    Extraction notes

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

    Details

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